or GREAT BRITAIN, the most consider- able of all the European islands, extends from the Lizard Point, in the latitude of about 50°, to Dane's Bay-head, in latitude 58° 30' N., or, taking it in a straight line from north to south, about eight degrees or 550 miles; and from Dover-head on the east to Land's-end on the west comprehends about seven degrees of longitude, which may be computed at about 290 miles; but the form being very irregular, and lessening continually towards the north, proper allowances must be made in computing its dimensions.

The ancient name of this island was Albion, the name Britian being then common to all the islands round it. Hence Agathemerus, speaking of the British islands: "They are many in number (says he); but the most considerable among them are Hibernia and Albion." And Ptolemy, to the chapter wherein he describes the island now called Great Britain, prefixes the following title: "the situation of Albion, a British island." But as this far excelled the other British islands, the name of Albion in process of time was laid quite aside, and that of Britain used in its stead. By this name it was known in Pliny's time, and even in Caesar's. The origin of both these names is very uncertain. Some derive that of Albion from the Greek word alphon, which, according to Festus, signifies white, the chalky cliffs, that in several places rise on the southern coasts, having that colour; while others pretend this name to have been borrowed from a giant feigned to have been the son of Neptune, and mentioned by several ancient authors. Some etymologists have recourse to the Hebrew, and others to the Phoenician; alben in the former signifying white, and alp in the latter signifying high. The origin of the name Britain is no less uncertain than that of Albion. Nennius and some other British writers derive it from Brutus, whom they likewise call Brita, the fifth in descent from the celebrated Æneas. Others derive it from the British words pryd Cain, that is, a white form, softened by degrees into Britannia. Camden derives it from the word brith, which, in the ancient language, of the island, signifies painted; and tania, importing, in Greek, a region or country: so that the word Brihania, changed in process of time into Britannia, expresses what the Britons really were, that is, painted. Sommer, differing Camden's etymology, proposes another, viz. that the name Britain comes from Brydio; signifying, in the British tongue, rage, and pointing out the violent motion of the sea that surrounds the island. Mr Whittaker, in his History of Manchester, derives it from the word brith, briel, brit, bris, or brig, which, he says, signifies divided or striped. Against the first of these etymologies it may be objected, that it is founded on a fable; and against the other four lies one common and unanswerable objection; which is, that the name of Britain was given to the island by foreigners, who could not borrow it from the British tongue, with which they were in all likelihood unacquainted. That the island received the name of Britain from foreigners is evident, since the natives never styled themselves Britons, nor their country Britain; their true name being Cunuri, or Cumbri; whence Cambria the name of Wales to this day among the Welsh.

The learned Bochart, speaking of the colonies and language of the Phœnicians, offers a conjecture which most of our modern writers have adopted as the most natural. The Phœnicians, according to that writer, called this island, and some others near it, Barat Anac, that is, the land or country of tin or lead, and more contractedly Bratanac; which name, passing from the Phœnicians to the Greeks, and from these to the Romans, might have been softened into that of Britanniæ, and Britannia. That the Phœnicians first discovered these islands, which were afterwards by the Greeks called Callicherides, and are proved by Camden to be our Scilly islands, appears both from Strabo and Pliny; of whom the former tells us, that the Phœnicians first brought tin from the Callicherides, which they sold to the Greeks, but kept the trade to themselves, and the place private; and the latter writes, that Mediocritus was the first who brought lead from the Callicherides; where Bochart shows that we ought to read Melicharitus, who is the Phœnician Hercules of Sanchotho, to whom that nation ascribes their first western discoveries. But notwithstanding the care of the Phœnicians to conceal these islands, the Greeks at last discovered them; and gave them the name of Callicherides, which, in the Greek tongue, signifies the same with Barat Anac in the Phœnician. This name was at first given to the islands of Scilly already mentioned, but by degrees communicated to all the others lying in the same sea. Thus Bochart. But after all, his opinion, however plausible in appearance, may be as foreign to the purpose as any of the rest; many instances of names given to new discovered countries showing that the origin of such names is not always owing to reason, but often to chance or caprice.

The general division of Britain is into England, Scotland, and Wales; for a particular description and history of which, see these articles.

In the year 1603, the kingdoms of Scotland and England fell under the dominion of one sovereign, by the accession of James VI. of Scotland to the throne of England. He derived his title to the latter from of England, being the grandson of Margaret, eldest daughter to Henry VII. of that kingdom; and, on the failure of all the male line, his hereditary right remained incontestable. Queen Elizabeth, with her latest breath, had recognized him for her successor; so that few sovereigns ever ascended a throne with more approbation of their subjects, or greater hopes of a peaceable and happy reign.

These hopes, however, were soon blasted; and the history of this monarch's reign consists of little else than a detail of disputes and contentions between him and his parliament. A particular and minute account of such transactions could afford very little entertainment; but it is of importance to know their origin, as they are to be reckoned the ultimate causes of those succeeding events which make so conspicuous a figure in the annals of Britain.

In those barbarous ages which preceded the period General we are now entering upon, the human mind, enervated by superstition, and obscured by ignorance of every art and science, seemed to have given up all pretensions to liberty, either religious or civil. Unlimited and uncontrolled despotism prevailed everywhere; and though England suffered less in this respect than almost any other nation, the many examples of arbitrary power exerted by her sovereigns, Queen Elizabeth herself, James's immediate predecessor, not excepted, show that Britain, they were very far from being then a free people. An incontestable proof of this, and an evidence how little restraint at that time the people could lay upon the authority of the sovereign, is, that the proceedings of parliament were accounted, even by themselves, of so little consequence, that they were not at the trouble to keep journals of them. It was not till the year 1607, four years after the accession of James, that parliamentary journals were kept, at the motion of Sir Edwin Sandys, a member of great authority in the house.

The proceedings of the parliament being at that time of so little consequence, it is no wonder that the sessions were not regular, or that little attention was paid to the choice or continuance of the members. In the reign of Elizabeth, and her predecessors, the sessions of parliament did not continue above the twelfth part so long as the vacations. It was then usual, after parliaments had been prolonged beyond one session, for the chancellor to exert a discretionary authority of issuing new writs to supply the place of any members whom he judged incapable of attending, either on account of their employment, sickness, or other impediment. No practice could be more dangerous to liberty than this, as it gave the chancellor, and consequently the sovereign, an opportunity of garbling at pleasure the representatives of the nation; yet so little was liberty at that time underflood, that the commons, of their own accord, without the least court influence or intrigue, and contrary to some former votes of their own, confirmed the chancellor's power in this respect in the 23d of Elizabeth. Nor did they proceed any farther in the assertion of their privileges, than to vote, that "during the sitting of parliament there do not, at any time, any writ go out for the choosing or returning any member without the warrant of the house."

Towards the end of the 16th or beginning of the 17th century, a great revolution took place, though sensibly, throughout all Europe. Arts and sciences began to flourish, commerce and navigation were greatly extended, and learning of all kinds began to diffuse itself. By more enlarged views, the love of freedom began, in England especially, to take place in the breasts of most people of birth and education; and this was greatly promoted by an acquaintance with the ancient Greek and Latin historians. From the example of the republics of Greece and Rome, whose members had so often sacrificed their lives for the sake of liberty, a patriotic spirit began to arise; and a desire of circumscribing the excessive prerogative and arbitrary proceedings of the crown began secretly to take place throughout the nation.

Nor was the desire unreasonable, or without a solid foundation. During the last years of Queen Elizabeth's reign, the commerce, navigation, and number of seamen in England, had sensibly decayed. A remonstrance from the Trinity-house in 1602 says, that since 1588, the number of seamen and shipping had decayed about a third part. Every species of domestic industry was fettered by monopolies; and by exclusive companies, which are only another species of monopoly, almost all foreign trade, except that to France, was brought into the hands of a few rapacious engrossers, and all prospect of future improvement in commerce was for ever sacrificed to a little temporary advantage of the sovereign.

These companies, though arbitrarily erected, had carried their privileges so far, that almost all the commerce of England centered in London; the customs of that port alone amounted to 110,000l. a-year; while those of all the kingdom besides amounted only to 17,000l.; nay, the whole trade of London was confined to about 200 citizens, who were easily enabled, by combining among themselves, to fix whatever price they pleased both on the exports and imports of the nation. Besides this, the subject were burdened by wardships and purveyances. The latter was an old prerogative of the crown, by which the officers of the household were empowered to take, without consent of the owners, provisions for the king's family, and carts and horses for the removal of his baggage, upon paying a stated price for them. The king had also a power of sending any person, without his consent, on whatever message he pleased; and thus he could easily force any individual to pay him whatever money he chose, rather than be sent out of the country on a disagreeable errand. Money extorted from individuals, by this or any other method, was called a benevolence.

There were some of the grievances under which the nation at this time laboured, and these rising spirit of patriotism tended to redress. This disposition, however, the severe government of Elizabeth had confined within very narrow bounds; but when James succeeded to the throne; a foreign prince, less dreaded and less beloved; symptoms of a more free and independent genius immediately appeared. Happily James neither perceived the alteration, nor had sufficient capacity to check its early advances. He had established in his James's own mind a speculative system of absolute government, arbitrary by which few of his subjects, and none but traitors and rebels, he thought, would make any scruple to admit. He considered himself as entitled to equal prerogatives with other European sovereigns, not conferring the military force with which their despotism was supported. The almost unlimited power which, for upwards of a century, had been exercised by the English sovereigns, he considered as due to royal birth and title, not to the prudence and spirit of those monarchs, or the conjunctions of the times. In his person, therefore, he imagined all legal power to be centered by an hereditary and divine right; nay, so fully was he persuaded that he was the absolute proprietor of his subjects, that in his speech to the parliament in 1621, he told them, that he "wished them to have said that their privileges were derived from the grace and permission of him and his ancestors." And when the same parliament protested that "the liberties, franchises, privileges, and jurisdictions of parliament, are the ancient and undoubted birthright and inheritance of the subjects of England," he was so enraged, that sending for the journals of the commons, he, with his own hand, before the council, tore out this protestation; and ordered his reasons to be inserted in the council book.

Such were the opposite dispositions of the prince and parliament, at the commencement of the Scottish line; dispositions just beginning to exist and to appear in parliament, but thoroughly established, and openly avowed on the part of the king, throughout his whole reign.

The consequence of such opposite dispositions prevailing in the king and parliament was, that during this reign... Britain. reign the prerogatives of the crown were violently and openly attacked; but the chief grounds of discontent were money and religion. The king's high notions of the royal prerogative made him imagine he had a right to whatever sums he pleased to demand; and his profusion caused him to dissipate in a short time the scanty supplies he could extort from the parliament, who seem to have behaved as unreasonably on the one hand as James himself did on the other. With regard to religious matters, the nation was at that time greatly infected with puritanism. Though the severities of Elizabeth had almost totally suppressed the Papists, it had been otherwise with the Puritans. So much had they increased by the very means which had diminished the number of Catholics, that no less than 750 clergymen of that persuasion signed a petition to James on his succession. They hoped that the king, having received his education in Scotland, and having always professed an attachment to the church established there, would at least abate the rigour of the laws enacted against the Puritans, if he did not show them particular favour and encouragement. But in this they were mistaken. He had observed in their Scots brethren a violent turn towards republicanism, and a zealous attachment to civil liberty. In the capacities both of monarch and theologian, he had experienced the little complaisance they were disposed to show him. They controll'd his commands; disputed his tenets; and to his face, before the whole people, censured his conduct and behaviour. This superiority assumed by the presbyterian clergy, the monarchical pride of James could never digest. Though he had been obliged while in Scotland to court their favour, he treasured up on that account the stronger resentment against them; and was determined to make them feel in their turn the weight of his authority. He therefore not only rejected the petition of the 750 clergymen above mentioned, but throughout his whole reign refused to relax in the least the severity of the laws against Protestant nonconformists, though very often petitioned in their favour by his parliament.

The same principles which occasioned in James such an aversion to the Puritans, prompted him greatly to favour the Episcopalians, and even the Papists, as being greater friends to despotism. In his youth he had been suspected of a bias towards the religion of the latter; and when he ascended the throne of England, it is certain he often endeavoured to procure some mitigation of the laws against them, if not an absolute toleration. But in this he was constantly opposed by the parliament; and indeed the strong inclination shown by James to establish Episcopacy throughout every corner of his dominions, tended very much to alienate the minds of the generality of his subjects, especially in Scotland, entirely from him.

In May 1617, the king set out for Scotland, expressly with the design of establishing Episcopacy in that kingdom. He did not, however, propose to abolish Presbytery entirely, and set up absolute Episcopacy in its room. He designed to content himself with establishing the royal authority above the ecclesiastical, and introducing some ceremonies into the public worship, such as kneeling at the sacrament, private communion, private baptism, confirmation of children, and the observance of Christmas, &c. But as his design was fully seen from the beginning, every advance towards Episcopacy gave the greatest discontent, and those trivial ceremonies were rejected as so many mortal sins.

At this time the power of the Scots clergy was exceedingly great; and the gloomy enthusiastic spirit with which they were actuated, prompted them to exercise it in such a manner as to make their tyranny infupportable to those who were of a different way of thinking from themselves. Every ecclesiastical court possessed the power of excommunication; which was then attended with some very serious temporal consequences, besides the spiritual ones which are supposed to flow from it. The person excommunicated was shunned by every one as profane and impious; his whole estate during his life-time, and all his moveables for ever, were forfeited to the crown. A sentence of excommunication was sometimes pronounced in a summary manner, by any ecclesiastical court, however inferior, against any person whether he lived within the bounds of their jurisdiction or not. And by this means, the whole tyranny of the inquisition, though without its orders, was introduced into Scotland. But the clergymen were not satisfied with this unbounded authority in ecclesiastical matters; they assumed a censorial power over every part of administration; and in all their sermons and even prayers mingling politics with religion, they inculcated the most seditious and turbulent principles.

One Black, a minister of St Andrew's, went so far as to pronounce in one of his sermons, that all kings were of some of the devil's children; and in his prayer for the queen he used these words, "We must pray for her for the fashion's sake, but we have no cause; she will never do us any good." Another minister preaching in the principal church of that capital, said, that the king was possessed with a devil; and that, one devil being expelled, seven worse had entered in his place. To which he added, that the subjects might lawfully rise, and take the sword out of the hands of their sovereign.

We can scarcely wonder that James should be desirous of subjugating such rebellious and turbulent spirits as design mischief; and, on the other hand, considering the extreme weakness of this monarch's understanding, and that he imagined himself able to manage not only furious religionists, but even the most powerful foreign nations, with no other weapon than mere argumentation, we can as little wonder at his want of success. In short, so far was James from being able to establish his royal authority above the ecclesiastical, that he found himself unable to introduce a single ceremony. He returned therefore with the mortification not only of seeing his schemes entirely baffled with regard to Scotland, but of having disgusted even the few of that nation over whom religious prejudices did not prevail: for they, considering the ceremonies so much insisted on by the king as trivial and insignificant, could not help thinking the national honour sacrificed by a servile imitation of the modes of worship practised in England, and that their sovereign betrayed equal narrowness of mind, though in an opposite manner, with those he so much condemned.

The like bad success attended James when he attempted some opposition to the puritanical innovations in England. He had observed in his progress through Puritans in that England. that kingdom, that a judical observance of the Sunday gained ground every day; and that by this means, under colour of religion, the people were debarred from such sports and recreations as contributed to their health as well as amusement. Imagining, therefore, that it would be easy to infuse cheerfulness into the dark spirit of devotion which then prevailed, he issued a proclamation to allow and encourage, after divine service, all kinds of lawful games and exercises; and this proclamation his subjects regarded as an instance of the utmost profaneness and impiety. In 1620 a bill was brought in by the commons for the more strict observance of the Sunday, which they affected to call the Sabbath. One Shepherd opposed this bill, objected to the appellation of Sabbath as puritanical, and seems even to have justified sports on that day. For this he was expelled the house by the suggestion of Mr Pym; and in the sentence pronounced against Shepherd, his offence is said to be great, exorbitant, and unparalleled.

This sketch, we hope, will be sufficient to give the reader a tolerable idea of the situation of affairs during the reign of James I. We now proceed to give an account of the few remarkable transactions which occurred in this period.

The first thing of any consequence was a conspiracy formed, the very year of the king's accession to the throne, to displace him, and bestow the kingdom on Arabella Stuart, a near relation of James's, and equally descended from Henry VII. With regard to this conspiracy everything remains still mysterious, as it was at the time when the conspiracy itself was discovered. What renders it remarkable is the concern Sir Walter Raleigh was said to have in it; for which he was tried, condemned without sufficient proof, suffered 13 years imprisonment in the Tower, and was afterwards executed out of complaisance to the Spaniards. See RALEIGH.

In 1605 was discovered the famous gunpowder treason, the anniversary of which discovery hath ever afterwards been celebrated with rejoicings. Its origin was as follows: On the accession of James, great expectations had been formed by the catholics, that he would prove favourable to them, both as that was the religion of his mother, and as he himself had been suspected of a bias towards it in his youth. It is even pretended that he had entered into a positive engagement to grant them a toleration as soon as he should mount the throne of England. Here, however, they found their hopes built on a false foundation. James on all occasions expressed his intention of executing strictly the laws enacted against them, and of persevering in all the rigorous measures of Queen Elizabeth. A plan of revenge was first thought of by one Catesby, a gentleman of good parts, and of an ancient family. He communicated his mind to Percy, a descendant of the house of Northumberland. The latter proposed to assassinate the king; but this seemed to Catesby very far from being adequate to their purpose. He told Percy, that the king would be succeeded by his children, who would also inherit his maxims of government. He told him, that even though the whole royal family were destroyed, the parliament, nobility, and gentry, who were all infected with the same heresy, would raise another Protestant prince to the throne.

"To serve any good purpose (says he), we must destroy, at one blow, the king, the royal family, the lords and commons; and bury all our enemies in one common ruin. Happily they are all assembled on the first meeting of parliament; and afford us the opportunity of glorious and useful vengeance. Great preparations will not be requisite. A few of us may run a mine below the hall in which they meet; and choosing the very moment when the king harangues both the houses, confine over to destruction those determined foes to all piety and religion. Meanwhile, we ourselves standing aloof, safe and unsuspected, shall triumph in being the instruments of divine wrath, and shall behold with pleasure those sacrilegious walls, in which were passed the edicts for prohibiting our church and butchering our children, tumbled into a thousand fragments; while their impious inhabitants, meditating perhaps still new persecutions against us, pass from flames above to flames below, there for ever to endure the torments due to their offences."

This terrible scheme being approved of, it was resolved to communicate it to a few more. One Thomas Winter was sent over to Flanders in quest of Fawkes, an officer in the Spanish service, of approved zeal and courage. All the conspirators were bound by the most solemn oaths, accompanied with the sacrament; and to such a degree had superstition effaced every principle of humanity from their minds, that not one of them ever entertained the smallest compunction for the cruel massacre they were going to commit. Some indeed were startled at the thoughts of destroying a number of catholics who must necessarily be present as spectators, or attendants on the king, or as having seats in the house of peers. But Tesmond a Jesuit, and Garnet superior of that order in England, removed those scruples, by showing that the interest of religion required in this case the sacrifice of the innocent with the guilty.

This happened in the spring and summer of 1604; when the conspirators also hired a house in Percy's name, adjoining to that in which the parliament was to assemble. Towards the end of that year they began to pierce through the wall of the house, in order to get in below that where the parliament was to sit. The wall was three yards thick, and consequently occasioned a great deal of labour. At length, however, they approached the other side, but were then startled by a noise for which they could not well account. Upon inquiry, they found that it came from a vault below the house of lords; that a magazine of coals had been kept there; and that the coals were then selling off, after which the vault would be let to the highest bidder. Upon this the vault was immediately hired by Percy; 36 barrels of powder lodged in it; the whole covered up with faggots and billets; the doors of the cellar boldly flung open; and every body admitted as if it contained nothing dangerous.

Being now, as they thought, assured of success, the conspirators began to plan the remaining part of their enterprise. The king, the queen, and Prince Henry, were expected to be present at the opening of the parliament. The duke, by reason of his tender age, would be absent, and it was resolved that Percy should seize or murder him. The princess Elizabeth, likewise a child, was kept at Lord Harrington's house in Warwickshire; and some others of the conspirators engaged Britain, to assemble their friends on pretence of a hunting match, when they were to seize that princess, and immediately proclaim her queen. The day so long wished for at last approached; the dreadful secret, though communicated to more than 20 persons, had been religiously kept for near a year and a half; and nothing could be foreseen which could possibly prevent the success of their design. Ten days before the meeting of parliament, however, Lord Monteagle, a catholic, son to Lord Morley, received the following letter, which had been delivered to his servant by an unknown hand.

"My lord, out of the love I bear to some of your friends, I have a care for your preservation. Therefore I would advise you, as you tender your life, to devise some excuse to shift off your attendance on this parliament. For God and man have determined to punish the wickedness of this time. And think not lightly of this advertisement; but retire yourself into the country, where you may expect the event in safety. For though there be no appearance of any stir; yet, I say, they shall receive a terrible blow this parliament; and yet they shall not see who hurts them. This counsel is not to be contemned, because it may do you good, and can do you no harm: for the danger is over as soon as you have burned this letter. And I hope God will give you the grace to make good use of it, to whose holy protection I commend you."—Though Monteagle imagined this letter to be only a ridiculous artifice to frighten him, he immediately carried it to Lord Salisbury, secretary of state; who laid it before the king on his arrival in town a few days after.

The king looked upon the letter in a more serious light. From the manner in which it was wrote he concluded that some design was forming to blow up the parliament-house with gunpowder, and it was thought advisable to search the vaults below. The lord chamberlain, to whom this charge belonged, purposely delayed the search till the day before the meeting of parliament. He remarked those great piles of wood and faggots which lay in the vault under the upper house; and casting his eye upon Fawkes, who stood in a corner and passed himself for Percy's servant, he took notice of that daring and determined courage, which was conspicuous in his face, and so much distinguished this conspirator even amongst the other heroes in villainy that were concerned in the scheme. Such a quantity of fuel, also, for one who lived so little in the town as Percy, appeared somewhat extraordinary; and, upon comparing all circumstances, it was resolved to make a further search. About midnight, Sir Thomas Knevet, a justice of peace, was sent with proper attendants; and before the door of the vault, finding Fawkes, who had just finished all his preparations, he immediately seized him, and, turning over the faggots, discovered the powder. The matches and every thing proper for setting fire to the train were taken in Fawkes's pocket; who seeing now no refuge but in boldness and despair, expressed the utmost regret that he had lost the opportunity of firing the powder at once, and of sweetening his own death with that of his enemies. For two or three days he displayed the same obstinate intrepidity; but, on being confined in the Tower, and the rack just thrown to him, his courage at last failed, and he made a full discovery of all the conspirators.

Catesby, Percy, and the other criminals, on learning that Fawkes was arrested, hurried away to Warwickshire; where Sir Edward Digby, imagining that his confederates had succeeded, was already in arms, to putify the princess Elizabeth. She had escaped into Coventry; and they were obliged to put themselves in a posture of defence against the country-people, who were raised from all quarters and armed by the sheriffs. The conspirators, with all their attendants, never exceeded the number of 80 persons; and being surrounded on every side, could no longer have any hope either of prevailing or escaping. Having therefore confessed themselves, and received absolution, they boldly prepared for death, and resolved to sell their lives as dear as possible. But even this miserable consolation was denied them. Some of their powder took fire and disabled them from defending themselves. The people then rushed in upon them. Percy and Catesby were killed with one shot. Digby, Rookwood, Winter, and others, being taken prisoners, were tried, confessed their guilt, and died, as well as Garnet, by the hands of the common executioner. The lords Stourton and Mordaunt, two catholics, were fined, the former of 4000l., the latter of 10,000l. by the Star-chamber; because their absence from parliament had occasioned a suspicion of their being made acquainted with the conspiracy. The earl of Northumberland was fined 30,000l. and detained several years a prisoner in the Tower; because, not to mention other grounds of suspicion, he had admitted Percy into the number of gentlemen pensioners, without his taking the requisite oaths.

In 1612, James appears in his most advantageous point of view, namely, as legislator of Ireland, and wife consented to undertake to civilize the barbarous inhabitants of that kingdom, and to render their subjection durable and useful to the crown of England. In this work, James proceeded by a steady, regular, and well-concerted plan. He began with abolishing the ancient Irish customs which supplied the place of laws, and which were exceedingly barbarous and absurd. By the Brehon law, every crime however enormous was punished, not with death, but by a fine. Murder itself was compensated in this way. Every one had a value affixed to him, called his eric; and whoever was able to pay this, might kill him when he pleased. As for such slight offences as oppression, extortion, or other things of that nature, no penalty was affixed to them, nor could any redress for them ever be obtained. By the custom of gavelkind, upon the death of any person, his land was divided among all the males of the sept or family, both bastard and legitimate; and after partition made, if any of the sept died, his portion was not shared out among his sons; but the chieftain at his discretion made a new partition of all the lands belonging to that sept, and gave every one his share: as no man, by reason of this custom, enjoyed the fixed property of any land; to build, cultivate, or improve, must have been so much lost labour. Their chieftains were established by election, or, more properly speaking, by force and violence. Their authority was obsolete; and, notwithstanding certain lands were assigned to the office, its chief profit resulted from exactions, dues, affinements, for which there was no fixed law, and which were levied at pleasure. After abolishing these customs, and substituting English law in their place; James having taken all the natives under his protection, and declared them free citizens, proceeded to govern them by a regular administration, military as well as civil. A sufficient army was maintained, its discipline inspected, and its pay transmitted from England, in order to prevent the soldiery from preying upon the country, as had been usual in former reigns. When O'Doghartie raised an insurrection, a reinforcement was sent over, and the rebellion immediately extinguished. All minds being first quieted by an universal indemnity, circuits were established, justice administered, and crimes of every kind severely punished. As the Irish had been universally engaged in a rebellion against Elizabeth, a renunciation of all the rights formerly granted them to separate jurisdictions was rigorously exacted; a renunciation to private estates was even required; and when they were restored, the proprietors received them under such conditions as might prevent all future tyranny and oppression over the common people. The whole province of Ulster having fallen to the crown by the attainder of rebels, a company was established in London for planting new colonies in that fertile country. The property was divided into moderate shares, the largest not exceeding 2000 acres; tenants were brought over from England and Scotland: The Irish were removed from the hills and fastnesses, and settled in the open country; husbandry and the arts were taught them; and by these means Ulster, from being the most wild and disorderly province in Ireland, soon became the best cultivated and most civilized.

This year was also remarkable for the death of Henry prince of Wales, who died suddenly on the 6th of November, not without strong suspicions of poison, for which the king himself was blamed. On opening his body, however, no symptoms of poison appeared; but his death diffused an universal grief throughout the nation, he being reckoned a prince of extraordinary accomplishments.

The marriage of the princess Elizabeth with Frederick elector palatine, which was celebrated February 14th 1613, served to dissipate the grief which had arisen on account of Prince Henry's death. But this marriage, in the event, proved unhappy to the king as well as his son-in-law. The elector, trusting to so great an alliance, engaged in enterprises beyond his strength; and James, not being able, and indeed perhaps not willing, to assist him in his distress, lost entirely what remained of the affections of his people.

These bad consequences did not begin to appear till chosen king the year 1619. At that time the states of Bohemia, having taken arms against the emperor Matthias, in defence of the Protestant religion, and continued their revolt against his successor Ferdinand II, and being alarmed at his mighty preparations against them, made an offer of their crown to the elector palatine. To this they were induced by the greatness of his connections, as being son-in-law to the king of England, and nephew to Prince Maurice, whose authority in the United Provinces was almost absolute; and the young palatine, stimulated by ambition, without consulting either James or Maurice, whose opposition he foresaw, immediately accepted the offer, and marched all his forces into Bohemia, in support of his new subjects.

The affairs of the new king were not long of coming to an unfortunate crisis. It was known almost at one time in England, that Frederic, being defeated in the great and decisive battle of Prague, had fled, with his family into Holland; and that Spinola the Spanish general had invaded the palatinate, where meeting with little resistance, except from one body of 2400 Englishmen commanded by the brave Sir Horace Vere, he had in a little time reduced almost the whole principality. In 1621, the ban of the empire was published against the unfortunate elector, and the execution of it was committed to the duke of Bavaria. The upper palatinate was in a little time conquered by that prince; and measures were taken in the empire for bestowing on him the electoral dignity of which the palatine was deprived. Frederic was now obliged to live with his numerous family in poverty and distress, either in Holland, or at Sedan, with his uncle the duke of Bouillon; and the new conquests of the Catholics throughout all Germany were attended with persecutions against the Protestants.

At this news the religious zeal of the English was inflamed to the highest degree; and they would have plunged headlong into a war with the house of Austria, without reflecting in the least on the consequences that might ensue. The sufferings of their Protestant brethren in Germany were the only objects of consideration, and the neutrality and inactive spirit shown by James was loudly exclaimed against. But though His ridiculous motives might have defended his pacific measures by very plausible arguments, it is certain that some of his motives were the most ridiculous that can be imagined. Such was the opinion that he himself entertained of his own wisdom, that he imagined himself capable of disarming hostile nations by dint of argument; and that the whole power of Austria, though not awed by the power of England, would submit to his arbitration, merely out of respect to his virtue and moderation.—So much also he was wedded to his opinion concerning the prerogative of kings, that he imagined, wherever there was a contention between any sovereign and his subjects, the latter behaved always to be in the wrong; and for this reason, from the very first he had denied his son-in-law the title of king of Bohemia, and forbade him to be prayed for in the churches under the appellation. Besides these reasons, James was on another account extremely averse to come to a rupture with Spain. He had entertained an opinion peculiar to himself, which was, that any alliance below that of a king was unworthy a prince of Wales; and he never would allow any princess but a daughter of France or Spain, to be mentioned as a match for his son. This piece of pride, which really implied meanness, as if he could have received honour from any alliance, gave Spain an opportunity of managing this monarch in his most important concerns. With a view to engage him to a neutrality with regard to the succession of Cleves, the elder daughter of the king of Spain had been indirectly offered during the life of Prince Henry. The bait, however, did not then take; James, in consequence of his alliance with the Dutch, marched 4000 men to the assistance of the Protestants, by which means the the succession was secured to the Protestant line. In 1618, Gondomar the Spanish ambassador made offer of the king's second daughter to Prince Charles; and, that he might render the temptation irresistible to the necessitous James, gave hopes of an immense fortune that should attend the princesses. Upon this match James had built great hopes, not only of relieving his own necessities, but of recovering the palatinate for his son-in-law; which last, he imagined, might be procured from the mere motives of friendship and personal attachment.

This last step was equally disagreeable to the commons with the rest; and, joined to the other pieces of James's conduct, at last blew into a flame the contention which had so long subsisted between their sovereign and them. On the 14th of November 1621, the commons framed a remonstrance which they intended to carry to the king. They represented, that the enormous growth of the Austrian power threatened the liberties of Europe; that the progress of the Catholic religion in England bred the most melancholy apprehensions lest it should again acquire an ascendant in the kingdom; that the indulgence of his majesty towards the professors of that religion had encouraged their insolence and temerity; that the uncontrolled conquests made by the Austrian family in Germany raised mighty expectations in the English Papists; but above all, that the Spanish match elevated them so far as to hope for an entire toleration, if not a final re-establishment, of their religion. They therefore intreated his majesty, that he would immediately undertake the defence of the palatinate, and maintain it by force of arms; that he would turn his sword against Spain, whose armies and treasuries were the chief support of the Catholic interest in Europe; that he would enter into no negociation for the marriage of his son but with a Protestant princess; that the children of Popish recusants should be taken from their parents, and committed to the care of Protestant teachers and schoolmasters; and that the fines and confiscations to which the Catholics by law were liable, should be levied with the utmost severity.

The king, who was then at Newmarket, hearing of the intended remonstrance, wrote a letter to the speaker, in which he sharply rebuked the house for debating on matters far above their reach and capacity; and he strictly forbade them to meddle with any thing that regarded his government, or deep matters of state, and especially not to touch on his son's marriage with the Spanish princess. Upon this the commons framed a new remonstrance, in which they asserted their right of debating on all matters of government, and that they possessed entire freedom of speech in their debates. The king replied, that their remonstrance was more like a denunciation of war, than an address of dutiful subjects; that their pretension to inquire into all state affairs without exception, was such a plenipotence as none of their ancestors, even during the reign of the weakest princes, had ever pretended to; that public transactions depended on a complication of views and intelligence, with which they were entirely unacquainted; that they could not better show their wisdom, as well as duty, than by keeping within their proper sphere; and that in any business which depended on his prerogative, they had no title to interpose with their advice, unless when he pleased to ask it, &c.

The commons in return framed the protestation already mentioned, which the king tore out of their journals, and soon after dissolved the parliament. The leading members of the house, Sir Edward Coke and Sir Robert Phillips, were committed to the Tower; three others, Selden, Pym, and Mallory, to other prisons; and, as a lighter punishment, some others were sent into Ireland to execute the king's business. Sir John Savile, however, a powerful man, in the house of commons, and a zealous opponent of the court, was made comptroller of the household, a privy councillor, and soon after a baron. This event is memorable; as being the first instance in the English history, of any king's advancing a man on account of parliamentary interest, and of opposition to his measures.

This breach between the king and parliament soon made politics become a general subject of discourse, the factions and every man began to indulge himself in reasonings and inquiries concerning matters of state; and the factions which commenced in parliament were propagated throughout the nation. In vain did James, by reiterated proclamations, forbid discourses of this kind. Such proclamations, if they had any effect, served rather to inflame the curiosity of the public. In every company or society the late transactions became the subject of argument and debate; some taking the side of monarchy, others of liberty; and this was the origin of the two parties since known by the names of Whigs and Tories.

For five years, James continued the dupe of the court of Spain. Though firmly resolved to contract no alliance with a heretic, the king of Spain had continued to procrastinate and invent one excuse after another, while he pretended to be very willing to conclude the match. At last the king of England, finding out what was really the matter, resolved to remove that obstacle if possible. He issued public orders for discharging all Popish recusants who were imprisoned; and it was daily apprehended that he would forbid, for the future, the execution of the penal laws against them. For this conduct he was obliged to apologize, and even pretend that it was done in order to procure from foreign princes a toleration for the Protestants; the severity of the English laws against Catholics, he said, having been urged as a reason against showing any favour to Protestants residing in catholic kingdoms.

These concessions in favour of the Catholics, however ill relished by his subjects, at last obtained James's end with regard to the marriage. The earl of Bristol, ambassador at the court of Spain, a minister of vigilance and penetration, and who had formerly opposed the alliance with Catholics, being now fully convinced of the Spanish sincerity, was ready to congratulate the king on the completion of his projects. The Spanish princess is represented as very accomplished; she was to bring with her a fortune of £60,000; and, what was more, not only Bristol considered this match as an infallible prognostic of the palatine's restoration, but the Spaniards themselves did the same. All things being therefore agreed upon between the parties, nothing was wanting but the dispensation from Rome, which might be considered as a matter of mere formality. The king exulted in his pacific counsels, and boasted of his superior sagacity and penetration; when all his flattering flattering prospects were blasted by the temerity of the duke of Buckingham, who governed both court and nation with almost unlimited sway.

This nobleman had suddenly been raised to the highest honours. Though possessed of some accomplishments of a courtier, he was utterly devoid of every talent of a minister; but at once partook of the influence which attends a fortune newly acquired, and the impetuosity which belongs to persons born in high stations, and unacquainted with opposition. Among those who had experienced the arrogance of this overgrown favourite, the prince of Wales himself had not been entirely spared; and a great coldness, if not enmity, had for that reason taken place between them. Buckingham being desirous of putting an end to this coldness, and at the same time envious of the great reputation of the earl of Bristol, persuaded the prince to undertake a journey to Madrid; which, he said, would be an unexpected gallantry; would equal all the fictions of Spanish romance; and, suiting the amorous and enterprising character of that nation, must immediately introduce him to the princess under the agreeable character of a devoted lover and daring adventurer. Little persuasion was necessary to prevail with Prince Charles to undertake this journey; and the impetuosity of Buckingham having extorted a consent from James, our two adventurers set out, Prince Charles as the knight-errant, and Buckingham as the esquire. They travelled through France in disguise, assuming the names of Jack and Tom Smith. They went to a ball at Paris, where the prince first saw the princess Henrietta, whom he afterwards married, who was then in the bloom of youth and beauty, and with whom the novelties of that time, say, he then fell in love. On their arrival at Madrid, every body was surprised by a step so little usual among great princes. The Spanish monarch made Charles a visit, expressed the utmost gratitude for the confidence he reposed in him, and made warm professions of a correspondent confidence and friendship. He gave him a golden key which opened all his apartments, that the prince might, without any introduction, have access to him at all hours: he took the left hand of him on every occasion, except in the apartments assigned to Charles; for there, he said, the prince was at home: Charles was introduced into the palace with the same pomp and ceremony which attended the kings of Spain on their coronation: the council received public orders to obey him as the king himself: Olivarez too, the prime minister, though a grandee of Spain, who has the right of being covered before his own king, would not put on his hat in the prince's presence: all the prisons of Spain were thrown open, and all the prisoners received their freedom, as if an event the most honourable and most fortunate had happened to the monarchy; and every sumptuary law with regard to apparel was suspended during Prince Charles's residence in Spain. The infanta, however, was only shown to her lover in public; the Spanish ideas of decency being so strict, as not to allow any farther intercourse till the arrival of the dispensation. The point of honour was carried so far by these generous people, that no attempt was made, on account of the advantage they had acquired by having the prince of Wales in their power, to impose any harder conditions of treaty: their pious zeal only prompted them on one occasion to desire more concessions in the religious articles; but, on the opposition of Bristol, they immediately desisted. The pope, however, hearing of Charles's arrival in Madrid, tack- ed some new clauses to the dispensation; and it became necessary to transmit the articles to London, that the king might ratify them. This treaty, which was made public, consisted of several articles, chiefly regarding the exercise of the Catholic religion by the infant; and, among these, nothing could reasonably be found fault with, except one article, in which the king promised that the children should be educated by the princess till they were ten years of age; which undoubtedly was insisted upon with a view of forming their minds with catholic principles. But, besides this public treaty, there were some private articles sworn to by James, which could not have been made public without grievous murmurs. A suspension of the penal laws against the English Catholics was promised, as likewise a repeal of them in parliament, and a toleration for the exercise of that religion in private houses. Meanwhile Gregory XV. who granted the dispensation, died; and Urban VIII. was chosen in his place. Upon this event, the nuncio refused to deliver the dispensation till it should be renewed by Urban. This the crafty pontiff delayed, in hopes that, during the prince's residence in Spain, some expedient might be fallen upon to effect his conversion. The king of England, as well as the prince, became impatient: but, on the first hint, Charles obtained leave to return; and Philip graced his departure with all the circumstances of civility and respect which had attended his arrival. He even erected a pillar on the spot where they took leave of each other, as a monument of mutual friendship; and the prince, having sworn to the observance of all the articles, embarked on board the English fleet at St Andero.

The modest, reserved, and decent behaviour of Charles, together with his unparalleled confidence in them, and the romantic gallantry he had practised with regard to their princess, had endeared him to the whole court of Madrid. But in the same proportion that Charles was beloved and esteemed, was Buckingham despised and hated. His follies of passion; his indecent freedoms with the prince; his dissolute pleasures; his arrogant impetuous temper, which he neither could nor would disguise; were to the Spaniards the objects of peculiar aversion. They lamented the infant's fate, who must be approached by a man whose temerity seemed to respect no laws divine or human. Buckingham, on the other hand, sensible how odious he was become to the Spaniards, and dreading the influence which that nation would naturally acquire after the arrival of the infant, resolved to employ all his credit in order to prevent the marriage. By what arguments he could prevail on the prince to offer such an insult to the Spanish nation, from whom he had received such generous treatment; by what colours he could disguise the ingratitude and imprudence of such a measure; these are totally unknown to us: certain it is, however, that when the prince left Madrid, he was firmly determined, in opposition to his most solemn promises, to break off the treaty with Spain. On their arrival at London, therefore, the prince and Buckingham assumed the entire direction of the negociation; and it was their business to seek for pretences by which they could give a colour to their intended breach of treaty.

At last, after many fruitless artifices were employed to delay or prevent the espousals, Bristol received positive orders not to deliver the proxy which had been left in his hands, or to finish the marriage, till security was given for the full restitution of the palatinate. Philip understood this language; but being determined to throw the whole blame of the rupture on the English, he delivered into Bristol's hand a written promise, by which he bound himself to procure the restoration of the palatinate either by persuasion or by every other possible means; and when he found that this concession gave no satisfaction, he ordered the infanta to lay aside the title of princess of Wales, which she bore after the arrival of the dispensation from Rome, and to drop the study of the English language; and as he knew that such rash counsels as now governed the court of England would not stop at the breach of the marriage-treaty, he immediately ordered preparations for war to be made throughout all his dominions.

A match for Prince Charles was soon after negotiated with Henrietta, daughter of the great Henry IV. and this met with much better success than the former. However, the king had not the same allurements in prosecuting this match as the former, the portion promised him being much smaller; but, willing that his son should not be altogether disappointed of a bride, as the king of France demanded only the same terms that had been offered to the court of Spain, James thought proper to comply. In an article of this treaty of marriage, it was stipulated, that the education of the children till the age of 13 should belong to the mother; and this probably gave that turn towards popery which has since proved the ruin of the unfortunate family of Stuart.

James now, being deprived of every other hope of relieving his son-in-law but by force of arms, declared war against Spain and the emperor, for the recovery of the palatinate; 6000 men were sent over into Holland to assist Prince Maurice in his schemes against those powers; the people were everywhere elated at the courage of their king, and were satisfied with any war which was to exterminate the Papists. This army was followed by another consisting of 12,000 men, commanded by Count Mansfeldt; and the court of France promised its assistance. But the English were disappointed in all their views: the troops being embarked at Dover, upon failing to Calais, found no orders for their admission. After waiting for some time, they were obliged to sail towards Zealand, where no proper measures were yet consulted for their disembarkation. Meanwhile, a pestilential disorder crept in among them, so long cooped up in narrow vessels: half the army died while on board; and the other half weakened by sickness, appeared too small a body to march into the palatinate; and thus ended this ill concerted and fruitless expedition. Whether this misfortune had any effect on the king's constitution or not, is uncertain; but he was soon after seized with a tertian ague, which put an end to his life on the 27th of March 1625, after having lived 59 years, and reigned over England 22, and over Scotland almost as long as he lived.

James was succeeded by his son Charles I., who ascended the throne amidst the highest praises and affections of his subjects, for what was perhaps the most blame-worthy action of his life, namely, his breaking off the match with the Spanish princesses, and procuring the rupture with the house of Austria. Being young and inexperienced, he regarded these praises as sanction for his actions; and therefore was impatient to assemble the great council of the nation, that he would gladly, for the sake of despatch, have called together the same parliament which sat under his father, and which lay at that time under prorogation. But being told that such a measure would appear unusual, he issued writs for summoning a new parliament on the 7th of May; and it was not without regret that the arrival of the princess Henrietta, whom he had espoused by proxy, obliged him to delay, by repeated prorogations, their meeting till the 18th of June, when they assembled at Westminster for the despatch of business.

Charles inherited from his father great distress for his money, very high notions of the royal prerogative, and rather a violent attachment to Episcopacy. As to his character, he seems to have been obstinate, though not refractory; and therefore, though it was scarce ever possible to make him give up his point; he never could carry on his designs with that spirit which was necessary for their success. In other respects, he appears to have possessed every virtue requisite to constitute the character of a good man. At present believing his subjects to be in perfect friendship with him, as he was with them, he resolved that their bounty to him should be entirely unasked, and the genuine effect of mutual confidence and regard. Accordingly, his discourse to His first parliament was full of simplicity and cordiality, speech to He lightly mentioned the occasion he had for supply, his parliament, who perfectly well knew his circumstances.

It is almost impossible to read without indignation Their scan an account of the return made by the commons to this dastardly generous behaviour of their sovereign. They knew proceedings, that all the money granted by the last parliament had been expended on military and naval preparations; and that great anticipations were likewise made on the revenues of the crown. They were not ignorant that Charles was loaded with a debt contracted by his father, who had borrowed money both from foreign princes, and from his own subjects. They had learned by experience, that the public revenues could with difficulty maintain the dignity of the crown, even under the ordinary charges of government. They were sensible that the present war was, very lately, the result of their own importunate applications and entreaties, and that they had solemnly engaged to support their sovereign in the management of it. They were acquainted with the difficulty of military enterprises directed against the whole house of Austria; against the king of Spain, possessed of the greatest riches and most extensive dominions of any prince in Europe; against the emperor Ferdinand, hitherto the most fortunate monarch of the age, who had subdued and astonished Germany by the rapidity of his victories. Deep impressions they saw must be made by the British sword, sword, and a vigorous offensive war be waged against these mighty potentates, ere they would resign the palatinate which they had now fully subdued, and which they held in secure possession by its being surrounded with all their other territories. To answer, therefore, all these great and important ends; to satisfy their young king in the first request he made them; to prove their sense of the many royal virtues, particularly economy, with which Charles was endowed; the commons thought proper to confer on the king a supply of £12,000l. To search for the reasons of such an extravagant piece of conduct would be needless; it is impossible they could be good.

It is not to be supposed that Charles, or any person of common sense, could be insensible of such treatment as this; he behaved, however, with great moderation. He represented in the most explicit manner the necessity there was for a large supply; he even condescended to use entreaties: he said that this request was the first he had ever made them; that he was young, and in the commencement of his reign; and if he now met with kind and dutiful usage, it would endear him to the use of parliaments, and would forever preserve an entire harmony between him and his people.—To these reasons and entreaties, the commons remained inexorable; they even refused the addition of two fifteenths to the former supply. Instead of this, they renewed their ridiculous complaints against the growth of Popery, which was now their only grievance. They showed their intolerant spirit by demanding a strict execution of the penal laws against the Catholics; and remonstrated against some late pardons granted to priests. They attacked Montague, one of the king's chaplains, on account of a moderate book which he had lately composed, and which, to their great disgust, saved virtuous Catholics as well as other Christians from eternal torments. Charles gave them a gracious and compliant answer; but firmly resolved to abate somewhat of the rigorous laws against that unfortunate party, which his engagements with France absolutely required. No measure, however, throughout the whole reign of this prince, was more disagreeable to his bigotted subjects, or by its consequences more fatal to himself than this resolution. The Puritans had continued to gain ground during the whole reign of James, and now formed the majority of the house of commons; in consequence of which, petitions were presented to the king for replacing such able clergymen as had been silenced for want of conformity to the ceremonies. They also enacted laws for the strict observance of Sunday, which they affected to call the Sabbath, and which they sanctified with the most melancholy indolence; and it is worthy of notice, that the different appellations of Sunday and Sabbath were at that time known symbols of the different parties. In consequence of this behaviour in Charles's first parliament, it was dissolved on the 12th of August 1625, and a new one called on February 6, 1626.

During this interval Charles had been obliged to borrow from his subjects on privy seals; the advantage of which was but a small compensation for the disgust it occasioned. By means, however, of that supply, and some other expedients, he was enabled to equip his fleet, though with difficulty. It was designed against Spain, but performed nothing worth notice, and its bad success increased the clamours against the court.

Charles's second parliament immediately adopted the same views with the former; however, they voted him a supply of three subsidies (£168,000l.), and three fifteenths; but the passing this vote into a law was referred until the end of the session, that in the meantime they might have an opportunity of forcing the king to make what concessions they pleased. This harsh and undutiful conduct was greatly resented by Charles; but he found himself obliged to submit, and wait the event with patience. In the mean time they attacked the duke of Buckingham, who was become generally obnoxious; and he was also impeached by the earl of Bristol, on account of his conduct with regard to the Spanish negociation. The earl's impeachment, however, was entirely overlooked, and the commons were able to prove nothing otherwise of any consequence against him. The king imagining that Buckingham's greatest crime was the having been so much in favour with his sovereign, commanded the house expressly not to meddle with his minister and servant, but to smite in a few days the bill they had begun for the subsidies; otherwise they must expect to fit no longer.

Suggestions of this kind had a bad effect; and when the king proceeded further to throw into prison two members of the house who had managed the impeachment against Buckingham, the commons declared that they would proceed no further in business till they had satisfaction in their privileges. Charles alleged as the reason of this measure, certain seditious expressions, which, he said, had, in their accusation of the duke, dropped from these members. Upon inquiry it appeared that no such expressions had been used, and the members were accordingly released. Soon after, the house of lords, moved by the example of the commons, claimed liberty for the earl of Arundel, who had been lately confined in the Tower; and after many fruitless evasions the king was obliged, though somewhat ungracefully, to comply.

The next attack made by the commons would have proved decisive, had it succeeded, and would have reduced the king to an absolute dependence on his parliament. They were preparing a remonstrance against the levying of tonnage and poundage without consent of parliament. This article, together with the new impositions laid on merchandise by James, constituted near one half of the crown revenues; and after having gained this point, they were to petition the king, which then would have been the same thing with commanding him, to remove Buckingham from his preface and councils. The king, however, being alarmed at the yoke they were preparing for him, dissolved his parliament a second time, June 15, 1626.

Charles having thus made such a breach with his parliament as there was no hopes of repairing, was obliged to have recourse to the exercise of every branch of his prerogative in order to supply himself with money. A commission was openly granted to compound with the Catholics, and agree for dispensing with the penal laws enacted against them; and by this expedient the king, indeed, filled his coffers, but gave universal disgust to his subjects. From the nobility he desired assistance; from the city he required a loan of £100,000l. The former contributed slowly; but the latter, covering themselves under many pretences and excuses, gave at last a flat denial. In order to equip a fleet, a distribution by order of the council was made to all the maritime towns; and each of them was required, with the affluence of the adjacent counties, to arm as many vessels as were appointed them. The city of London was rated at 20 ships; and this is the first appearance, in Charles's reign, of ship-money; a taxation which had once been imposed by Elizabeth, but which, when carried some steps farther by Charles, produced the most violent discontentments. These methods of supply were carried on with some moderation, till news arrived of the king of Denmark being totally defeated by Count Tilly the imperial general; but money then becoming more than ever necessary, it was suggested in council, that the most speedy, equal, and convenient method of supply was by a general loan from the subject, according as every man was assessed in the rolls of the last subsidy. That precise sum was required which each would have paid, had the vote of four subsidies been passed into a law; care, however, was taken, that the sums thus exacted were not to be called subsidies but loans; but it was impossible to avoid observing, that thus the liberty of the subject was entirely destroyed, and all parliaments rendered at once superfluous.

Many people throughout England refused these loans, and some were even active in encouraging their neighbours to insist upon their common rights and privileges. By warrant of the council, these were thrown into prison. Most of them patiently submitted to confinement, or applied by petition to the king, who commonly released them. Five gentlemen, however, Sir Thomas Darnell, Sir John Corbet, Sir Walter Earl, Sir John Heweningham, and Sir Edmond Hambden, demanded release, not as a favour from the court, but as their due by the laws of their country. No particular cause was assigned for their commitment. The special command of the king and council alone was pleaded. And it was alleged, that by law this was not sufficient reason for refusing bail or release to the prisoners. The question was brought to a solemn trial before the court of king's bench; and the whole kingdom was attentive to the issue of the cause. By the debates on this subject it appeared, that personal liberty had been secured by no less than six different statutes, and by an article in magna charta itself. It appeared, that, in times of turbulence and sedition, the princes infringed upon these laws; and of this also many examples were produced. The difficulty then lay to determine when such violent measures were necessary; but of that the court pretended to be the supreme judge. As it was legal, therefore, that these five gentlemen should plead the statute, by which they might demand bail, so it was expedient in the court to remand them to prison, without determining on the necessity of taking bail for the present. This was a cruel evasion of justice; and, in fact, satisfied neither party. The court insisted that no bail could be taken; the country exclaimed that the prisoners ought to be set free.

While the king was thus embroiled with his parliament at home, and with powerful nations abroad, he rashly engaged in a war with France, a kingdom with which he had but lately formed the most natural alliance. All historians agree that this war proceeded from the rivalryship of the duke of Buckingham and Cardinal Richelieu; both of whom were in love with the queen of France; and an inveterate enmity being thus produced between these favourites, they resolved to involve their respective nations in the dispute. However this be, war was declared against France; and Charles was taught to hope, that hostilities with that kingdom would be the surest means of procuring tranquillity at home. The success of this war was proportionable to the wisdom with which it was commenced. Buckingham was appointed commander; and he being entirely unacquainted both with sea and land service, managed matters so ill, that he lost two-thirds of his army, and returned in total discredit both as an admiral and general.

The discontent in England now rose to such a height, that there was reason to apprehend an insurrection or rebellion. Charles was also reduced to the greatest distress for want of money. That which he had levied by virtue of his prerogative came in very slowly, and it was dangerous to renew the experiment on account of the ill humour of the nation in general. A third parliament therefore was called, March 17th, 1628; whom Charles plainly told at the beginning of parliament the faction, that "if they should not do their duties, in calling contributing to the necessities of the state, he must, in discharge of his conscience, use those other means which God had put into his hands, in order to save that which the follies of some particular men might otherwise put in danger." This parliament behaved in a much more reasonable manner than either of the two former ones. The nation was now really aggrieved by the late arbitrary proceedings. They began with voting against arbitrary imprisonments and forced loans; after which, five subsidies (280,000l.) were voted to the king. With this sum, though much inferior to his wants, Charles declared himself well satisfied; and even tears of affection started in his eye when informed of this concession; the commons, however, resolved not to pass this vote into a law, before they had obtained from the king a sufficient security that their liberties should be no longer violated as they had formerly been. They resolved petition to frame a law, which they were to call a petition of right franchise, in which they should collect all the arbitrary assertions of the prerogative which Charles had exposed to their view, and these they were to assault at once by their petition. The grievances now complained of were, forced loans, benevolences, taxes without consent of parliament, arbitrary imprisonments, billeting soldiers, and martial law. They pretended not, as they affirmed, to any unusual power or privileges; nor did they intend to infringe the royal prerogative in any respect: they aimed only at securing those rights and privileges derived from their ancestors.

The king, on his part, now began plainly to show, duplicity that he aimed at nothing less than absolute power, of the king. This reasonable petition he did his utmost to evade, by repeated messages to the house, in which he always offered his royal word that there should be no more infringements on the liberty of the subject. These messages, however, had no effect on the commons: they knew how insufficient such promises were, without further security; and therefore the petition at last passed both houses, and nothing was wanting but the royal assent. assent to give it the force of a law. The king accordingly came to the house of peers, sent for the commons, and being seated in the chair of state, the petition was read to him. In answer to it, he said, "The king willeth, that right be done according to the laws and customs of the realm, and that the statutes be put into execution; that his subjects may have no cause to complain of any wrong or oppression contrary to their just rights and liberties, to the preservation whereof he holds himself in conscience as much obliged as of his own prerogative."

This equivocal answer was highly resented. The commons returned in very ill humour. Their indignation would undoubtedly have fallen on the unfortunate Catholics, had not their petition against them already received a satisfactory answer. To give vent to their present wrath, therefore, they fell on Dr Manwaring, who had preached a sermon, and, at the special command of the king, printed it; which was now found to contain doctrines subversive of all civil liberty. It taught, that though property was commonly lodged in the subject, yet, whenever any exigency required supply, all property was transferred to the sovereign; that the consent of parliament was not necessary for the imposition of taxes; and that the divine laws required compliance with every demand, however irregular, which the prince should make upon his subjects. For these doctrines Manwaring was sentenced to be imprisoned during the pleasure of the house; to be fined 100l. to the king; make submission and acknowledgement for his offence; be suspended three years; be incapable of holding any ecclesiastical dignity or secular office; and that his book be called in and burnt.

No sooner, however, was the session ended, than Manwaring received a pardon, and was promoted to a living of considerable value. Some years afterwards he was promoted to the see of St Asaph. At last, the king, seeing it was impossible to carry his point, yielded to the importunities of parliament. He came to the house of peers, and pronouncing the usual form of words, "Let it be law as is desired," gave full sanction and authority to the petition. The house re-founded with acclamations, and the bill for five subsidies immediately passed.

The commons, however, were not yet satisfied; they began again to attack Buckingham, against whom they were implacable: they also asserted, that the levying of tonnage and poundage without consent of parliament was a palpable violation of the ancient liberties of the people, and an open infringement of the petition of right so lately granted. The king, in order to prevent a remonstrance on that subject, suddenly prorogued the parliament, on June 26, 1628.

The commons soon got rid of their enemy Buckingham; who was murdered on the 23d of August this same year, by one Felton, who had formerly served under him as a lieutenant. The king did not appear much concerned at his death, but retained an affection for his family throughout his whole lifetime. He desired also that Felton might be tortured, in order to extort from him a discovery of his accomplices; but the judges declared, that though that practice had been formerly very common, it was altogether illegal.

In 1629, the usual contentions between the king and his parliament continued. The great article on which the commons broke with their sovereign, and which finally created in him a disgust at all parliaments, was their claims with regard to tonnage and poundage. The dispute was, whether this tax could be levied without consent of parliament or not. Charles, supported by multitudes of precedents, maintained that it might; and the parliament, in consequence of their petition of right, asserted that it could not. The commons were resolved to support their rights: and the disputes concerning tonnage and poundage went hand in hand with some theological controversies; particularly concerning Arminianism, which the Puritans, who now formed the majority of the nation, opposed with the greatest violence, and which consequently crept among those who professed Episcopacy, where it hath still maintained its ground more than in any other party.

The commons began with summoning before them the officers of the custom-house, to give an account by what authority they had seized the goods of those merchants who had refused to pay the duties of tonnage and poundage. The barons of exchequer were questioned with regard to their decrees on that head. The sheriff of London was committed to the Tower for his activity in supporting the officers of the custom-house. The goods of Rolles, a merchant, and member of the house, being seized for his refusal to pay the duties, complaints were made of this violence, as if it were a breach of privilege. Charles, on the other hand, supported his officers in all these measures, and the quarrel between him and the commons became every day higher. Sir John Elliot framed a remonstrance against tonnage and poundage, which he offered to the clerk to read; but it was refused, and he then read it himself. The question being called for, Sir John Finch the speaker said, that he had a command from the king to adjourn, and to put no question; upon which he rose and left the chair. The whole house was in an uproar; the speaker was pushed back into the chair, and forcibly held in it, till a short remonstrance was formed, which was instantaneously passed by almost universal acclamation. Papists and Arminians were now declared capital enemies to the commonwealth. Those who levied tonnage and poundage were branded with the same epithet. And even the merchants, who should voluntarily pay these duties, were declared betrayers of English liberty, and public enemies. The doors being locked, the gentleman-usher of the house of lords, who was sent by the king, could get no admittance till this remonstrance was finisht. By the king's order he took Parliament the mace from the table, which put an end to their proceedings, and on the 10th of March the parliament was dissolved. Some of the members were imprisoned and fined; but this severity served only to increase the general discontent, and point out the sufferers as proper leaders for the popular party.

Charles being now disgusted with parliaments, resolved to call no more; but finding himself destitute of resources, was obliged to make peace with the two powers with which he was at war. A treaty was signed with France on the 14th of April, and another with Spain on the 5th of November 1630, by which Charles bound himself to observe a neutrality with regard to the affairs on the continent. His conduct to his subjects cannot now appear entirely blameless, nor the general discontent discontent altogether without foundation. As if, however, he had resolved to ruin himself, and to lose the small degree of affection which remained among his subjects, Charles now began to set about making innovations in religion. Archbishop Laud had obtained a prodigious ascendancy over the king; and, by his superstitious attachment to foolish ceremonies, led him into a conduct that proved fatal to himself and to the kingdom in general. The humour of the nation ran at that time in a channel perfectly the reverse of superstition. The ancient ceremonies which had been sanctified by the permission and practice of the first reformers, could scarce be retained in divine service. Laud chose this time, of all others the most improper, for renewing the ceremonies of the fourth and fifth century, when the Christian church, as is well known, was sunk into the superstitions which were afterwards continued and augmented by the policy of the church of Rome. So openly were these tenets espoused, that not only the discontented Puritans believed the church of England to be relapsing fast into the Romish superstition, but the court of Rome itself entertained hopes of regaining its authority in this island. To forward Laud's good intentions, an offer was twice made to him, in private, of a cardinal's hat; which he declined accepting. His answer was (as he says himself), that "something dwelt within him which would not suffer his compliance till Rome was other than it is." It must be confessed, however, that though Laud deserved not the appellation of a Papist, the genius of his religion was, though in a less degree, the same with that of the Romish. The same profound respect was exacted to the sacerdotal character; the same submission to the creeds and decrees of synods and councils required; the same pomp and ceremony was affected in worship; and the same superstitious regard to days, postures, meats, and vestments. Orders were given, and rigorously insisted on, that the communion table should be removed from the middle of the area where it had hitherto stood in all churches except cathedrals. It was placed at the east end, raised in, and denominated an altar; as the clergyman who officiated commonly received the appellation of priest. All kinds of ornaments, especially pictures, were introduced. Some of these, upon inquiry, were found to be the very same that were to be met with in the missal-book. The crucifix too, that perpetual consolation of all pious Catholics, and terror to all sound Protestants, was not forgot on this occasion.

In return for Charles's indulgence towards the church, Laud and his fellows took care to magnify on every occasion the regal authority, and to treat with the utmost disdain or detestation all puritanical pretensions to a free and independent constitution. From this subjection, however, they took care to exclude themselves, and insisted upon a divine and apostolical charter in preference to a legal and parliamentary one. The sacerdotal character was magnified as sacred and indefeasible; all right to spiritual authority, or even to private judgment in spiritual subjects, was refused to profane laymen: ecclesiastical courts were held by bishops in their own name, without any notice taken of the king's authority: and Charles, though extremely jealous of every claim in popular assemblies, seemed rather to encourage than repel those encroachments of his clergy.

The principles which exalted prerogative were put in practice during the whole time that Charles ruled without parliaments. He wanted money for the support of government; and he levied it, either by the revocation of obsolete laws, or by violations of the privileges. Though humane and gentle in his nature, he gave way to severities in the star chamber and high commission, which seemed necessary in order to support the present mode of administration, and suppress the rising spirit of liberty throughout the kingdom. Tonnage and poundage were continued to be levied by royal authority alone. The former arbitrary impositions were still affected; and even new impositions laid upon the different kinds of merchandise. The custom-house officers received orders from the council to enter into any house, warehouse, or cellar; to search any trunk or chest; and to break any bulk whatever, in default of the payment of customs. In order to exercise the militia, each county, by an edict of the council, was assessed in a certain sum for maintaining a muster-master appointed for that service. Compositions were openly made with recusants, and the Popish religion became a regular part of the revenue. A commission was granted for compounding with such as were possessed of crown-lands on defective titles; and on this pretence some money was exacted of the people, &c.

While the English were in the utmost discontent, and almost ready to break out in open rebellion by tempting to these arbitrary proceedings, Charles thought proper to attempt setting up Episcopacy in Scotland. The canons for established ecclesiastical jurisdiction were promulgated in 1635, and were received without much appearance of opposition; yet with great inward apprehension and discontent. The first reading of the liturgy was attempted in the cathedral church of St Giles in Edinburgh, in 1637; but this produced such a tumult, that it was not thought safe to repeat the experiment. An universal combination against the religious innovations began immediately to take place; but Charles, as if obstinately bent on his own destruction, continued inflexible in his purpose, though he had nothing to oppose to the united force of the kingdom, but a proclamation, in which he pardoned all past offences, and exhorted the people to be more obedient for the future, and to submit peaceably to the use of the liturgy. This proclamation hastened forward the insurrection which had been slowly advancing before.

Four tables, as they were called, were formed in Edinburgh. One consisted of nobility, another of gentry, a third of ministers, and the fourth of burgesses. The table of gentry was divided into many subordinate ones, according to the different counties. In the hands of the four tables, the authority of the whole kingdom was placed. Orders were issued by them, and everywhere obeyed with the utmost regularity; and among the first acts of their government was the production of the Covenant.

This famous covenant consisted of a renunciation of all Ponerism, formerly signed by James in his youth, and the covenant filled with many virulent invectives against that party. A bond of union followed, by which the subscribers obliged themselves to resist all religious innovations, and to defend each other against all opposition whatsoever: And all this for the greater glory of God, and the greater honour and advantage of their king and country. The covenant was subscribed by people of all ranks and conditions. Few disapproved of it in their hearts, and still fewer dared openly to condemn it. The king's ministers and counsellors themselves were mostly of the same way of thinking; and none but rebels to God, and traitors to their country, it was thought, would withdraw themselves from so salutary and pious a combination.

The king now began to be alarmed. He sent the marquis of Hamilton, as commissioner, with authority to treat with the covenanters. He required the covenant to be renounced and recalled; and he thought that on his part he made very satisfactory concessions, when he offered to suspend the canons and liturgy till in a fair and legal way they could be received, and so to model the high commission that it should no longer give offence to his subjects. In answer to this demand the covenanters told him, they would sooner renounce their baptism; and invited the commissioner himself to sign it. Hamilton returned to London; made another fruitless journey with new concessions to Edinburgh; returned again to London, and was immediately sent back with still more satisfactory concessions. The king was now willing to abolish entirely the canons, the liturgy, and the high commission court; he even resolved to limit extremely the power of the bishops, and was content if on any terms he could retain that order in the church of Scotland. And to ensure all these gracious offers, he gave Hamilton authority to summon first an assembly, and then a parliament, where every national grievance should be redressed.—These successive concessions only showed the weakness of the king, and encouraged the malcontents to rise in their demands. The offer, however, of an assembly and a parliament, in which they expected to be entirely masters, was very willingly embraced by the covenanters.

Charles perceiving what advantage his enemies had reaped from their covenant, resolved to have a covenant also on his side; and he ordered one to be drawn up for that purpose. It consisted of the same violent renunciation of Popery with the other; which, though the king did not approve of it, he thought proper to adopt, in order to remove all the suspicions entertained against him. As the covenanters, in their bond of mutual defence against all opposition, had been careful not to except the king; Charles had formed a bond which was annexed to this renunciation, and which expressed the subscribers loyalty and duty to his majesty. But the covenanters perceiving that this new covenant was only meant to weaken and divide them, received it with the utmost scorn and detestation. And, without delay, they proceeded to model the assembly from which such great achievements were expected.

The assembly met at Glasgow in 1638. A firm determination had been entered into of utterly abolishing Episcopacy; and, as a preparative to it, there was laid before the presbytery of Edinburgh, and solemnly read in all the churches of the kingdom, an accusation against the bishops, as guilty, all of them, of heresy, simony, bribery, perjury, cheating, incest, adultery, fornication, common-swearers, drunkenness, gaming, breach of the Sabbath, and every other crime which had occurred to the accusers. The bishops sent a protest, declining the authority of the assembly; the commissioner too protested against that court, as illegally constituted and elected; and, in his majesty's name, dissolved it. This measure was foreseen, and little regarded. The court still continued to sit and do business. All the acts of assembly, since the accession of James to the crown of England, were, upon pretty reasonable grounds, declared null and invalid. The acts of parliaments which affected ecclesiastical affairs were on that very account supposed to have no authority. And thus the whole fabric which James and Charles, in a long course of years, had been rearing with much care and policy, fell at once to the ground. The covenant likewise was ordered to be signed by every one, under pain of excommunication.

In 1639, the covenanters prepared in earnest for war. The earl of Argyle, though he long seemed disposed for temporise, at last embraced the covenant; and he became the chief leader of that party. The earls of Rothes, Caflis, Montrofe, Lothian, the lords Lindey, Loudoun, Yetter, and Balmerino, also distinguished themselves. Many of their officers had acquired reputation in the German wars, particularly under Gustavus; and these were invited over to assist their country in its present necessity. The command was entrusted to Leffy, a soldier of experience and ability. Forces were regularly enlisted and disciplined. Arms were commissioned and imported from foreign countries. A few castles which belonged to the king, being unprovided of victuals, ammunition, and garrisons, were soon seized. And the whole country, except a small part where the marquis of Huntly still adhered to the king, being in the covenanters hands, was soon put into a tolerable posture of defence.

Charles, on the other hand, was not deficient in his endeavours to oppose this formidable combination. By regular economy he had not only paid all the debts contracted in the French and Spanish wars, but had amassed a sum of 200,000l.; which he had reserved for any sudden exigency. The queen had great interest with the Catholics, both from the sympathy of religion, and from the favours and indulgencies which she had been able to procure them. She now employed her credit, and persuaded them, that it was reasonable to give large contributions, as a mark of their duty to the king, during this urgent necessity: And thus, to the great scandal of the Puritans, a considerable supply was gained. The king's fleet was formidable and well supplied. Having put 5000 land forces on board, he intrusted it to the marquis of Hamilton, who had orders to sail to the frith of Forth, and cause a diversion in the forces of the malcontents. An army was levied of near 20,000 foot and 3000 horse; and was put under the command of the earl of Arundel, a nobleman of great family, but celebrated neither for military nor political abilities. The earl of Essex, a man of strict honour, and extremely popular, especially among the soldiery, was appointed lieutenant-general: The earl of Holland was general of the horse. The king himself joined the army, and he summoned all the peers of England to attend him. The whole had the appearance of a splendid court rather than a military armament, and in this situation the camp arrived at Berwick.

The Scottish army was equally numerous with that of the king, but inferior in cavalry. The officers had more experience; and the soldiers, though ill disciplined and armed, were animated, as well by the national aversion to England, and the dread of becoming a province to their old enemy, as by that religious enthusiasm which was the occasion of the war. Yet so prudent were their leaders, that they immediately sent very submissive messengers to the king, and craved leave to be admitted to a treaty. Charles, as usual, took the worst course. He concluded a sudden pacification, in which it was stipulated, that he should withdraw his fleet and army; that within 48 hours the Scots should dismiss their forces; that the king’s forts should be restored to him, his authority be acknowledged, and a general assembly and parliament be immediately summoned, in order to compose all differences.

This peace was of no long duration. Charles could not prevail on himself to abandon the cause of Episcopacy, and secretly intended to seize every favourable opportunity to recover the ground he had lost. The assembly, on the other hand, proceeded with the utmost fury and violence. They voted Episcopacy to be unlawful in the church of Scotland: they stigmatized the canons and liturgy as popish: they denominated the high commission tyranny. The parliament, which sat after the assembly, advanced pretensions which tended to diminish the civil power of the monarch; and, what probably affected Charles still more, they were proceeding to ratify the acts of assembly, when by the king’s instructions Traquair the commissioner pro-rogued them. And on account of these claims, which might have been easily foreseen, war was recommenced the same year.

No sooner had Charles concluded the peace, than he found himself obliged to disband his army, on account of his want of money; and as the soldiers had been held together merely by mercenary views, it was not possible, without great trouble, expense, and loss of time, to reassemble them. On the contrary, the covenanters, in dismissing their troops, had been careful to preserve nothing but the appearance of a pacification. The officers had orders to be ready on the first summons: The soldiers were warned not to think the nation secure from an English invasion: And the religious zeal which animated all ranks of men made them immediately fly to their standards, as soon as the trumpet was sounded by their spiritual and temporal leaders.

In 1640, however, the king made shift to draw an army together; but finding himself unable to support them, was obliged to call a parliament after an intermission of about 11 years. As the sole design of the king’s calling this parliament was to obtain a supply, and the only reason they had for attending was to procure a redress of grievances, it is not to be supposed there could be any good agreement between them. The king accordingly insisted for money, and the parliament on their grievances, till a dissolution ensued.

—To add to the unpopularity of this measure, the king, notwithstanding his dissolving the parliament, allowed the convocation to sit; a practice of which, since the Reformation, there had been very few examples, and which was now by many deemed very irregular. Besides granting to the king a supply from the spirituality, the convocation, jealous of innovations similar to those which had taken place in Scotland, imposed an oath on the clergy and the graduates in the universities, by which every one swore to maintain the established government of the church, by archbishops, bishops, deans, chapters, &c. These steps were deemed illegal, because not ratified by consent of parliament; and the oath, containing an &c. in the middle of it, became a subject of general ridicule.

The king, disappointed of parliamentary subsidies, Charles did was obliged to have recourse to other expedients. The treasuries for ecclesiastical subsidies served him in some stead; and it seemed but just that the clergy should contribute to the expense of a war which had been in a great measure of their own raising. He borrowed money from his ministers and courtiers: and so much was he beloved among them, that above 300,000l. were subscribed in a few days. Some attempts were made towards forcing a loan from the citizens: but still repelled by the spirit of liberty, which was now become unconquerable. A loan of 40,000l. was extorted from the Spanish merchants who had bullion in the Tower. Coat and conduct money for the soldiery was levied on the counties; an ancient practice, but which was supposed to be abolished by the petition of right. All the pepper was bought from the East India Company upon trust; and sold, at a great discount, for ready money. A scheme was proposed for coining two or three hundred thousand pounds of base money. Such were the extremities to which Charles was reduced. The fresh difficulties, which amidst the present distresses were every day raised, with regard to the payment of ship-money, obliged him to exert continual acts of authority, augmented extremely the discontent of the people, and increased his indigence and necessities.

The present expedients, however, enabled the king, though with great difficulty, to march his army, consisting of 19,000 foot and 2000 horse. The earl of Northumberland was appointed general; the earl of Strafford, who was called over from Ireland, lieutenant-general; Lord Conway, general of the horse. A small fleet was thought sufficient to serve the purposes of this expedition. The Scots, though somewhat superior, were sooner ready than the king’s army, and marched to the borders of England. Notwithstanding their warlike preparations and hostile attempts, the covenanters still preferred the most submissive language to the king; and entered England with no other design, they said, than to obtain access to the king’s presence, and lay their humble petition at his royal feet. At Newburn Royalists upon Tyne they were opposed by a detachment of 4500 defeated at men under Conway, who seemed resolute to dilute Newburn with them the passage of the river. The Scots first entertained them, with great civility, not to stop them in their march to their gracious sovereign; and then attacked them with great bravery, killed several, and chased the rest from their ground. Such a panic seized the whole English army, that the forces at Newcastle fled immediately to Durham; and not yet thinking themselves safe, they deserted that town, and retreated into Yorkshire. The Scots continued to advance; they dispatched messengers to the king, who was now arrived at York. They took care, after the advantage they had gained, to redouble their expressions of loyalty, duty, and submission to his person: and they even made apologies full of sorrow and contrition for their late victory. Charles was in a very distressed condition; and, in order to prevent the further advance of the Scots, agreed to a treaty, and named 16 English noblemen to meet with 11 Scots commissioners at Rippon. Stafford, upon whom, by reason of Northumberland's sickness, the command of the army had devolved, advised Charles rather to put all to hazard, than to submit to such unworthy terms as he saw would be imposed upon him. He advised him to push forward and attack the Scots, and bring the affair to a quick decision; and if he was ever so unsuccessful, nothing worse could befall him than what from his inactivity he would certainly be exposed to; and, to show how easily this project might be executed, he ordered an assault to be made on some quarters of the Scots, and gained an advantage over them. This salutary advice Charles had not resolution to follow. He therefore resolved to call a council of the peers; and as he foresaw that they would advise him to call a parliament, he told them in his first speech, that he had already taken that resolution. In order to subdue both armies (for the king was obliged to pay his enemies, in order to save the northern counties), Charles wrote to the city, desiring a loan of 200,000l. And the peers at York, whose authority was now much greater than that of their sovereign, joined in the same request.

The parliament met November 3, 1640: the house of commons had never been observed so numerous; and, that they might strike a decisive blow at once against the court, they began with the impeachment of the earl of Strafford. That nobleman, who was considered as prime minister, both on account of the credit he possessed with his master, and his own uncommon vigour and capacity, had now the misfortune of having incurred the hatred of all the three kingdoms. The Scots looked upon him as the capital enemy of their country. He had engaged the parliament of Ireland to advance large subsidies to be employed in a war against them; he had levied an army of 9000 men, with which he had menaced all their western coast: he had obliged the Scots who lived under his government to renounce the covenant, &c.; he had governed Ireland, first as deputy, and then as lord lieutenant, during eight years, with great vigilance, activity, and prudence, but with very little popularity. In a nation so adverse to the English government and religion, these very virtues were sufficient to draw on him the public hatred. His manners, besides, were at bottom haughty, rigid, and severe; and no sooner did adversity begin to seize him, than the concealed aversion blazed up at once, and the Irish parliament used every expedient to aggravate the charge against him.

The universal discontent which prevailed throughout the English nation was all pointed against the earl of Strafford; though for no other reason but because he was the minister of state whom the king most favoured and trusted. His extraction was honourable, his paternal fortune considerable: yet envy attended his sudden and great elevation; and his former associates in popular counsels, finding that he owed his advancement to the defection of their cause, represented him as the great apostate of the commonwealth, whom it behoved them to sacrifice as a victim to public justice.

From so terrible a combination against a single person, nothing else could be expected, than what really happened. Strafford was impeached, most unjustly condemned, and at last executed, in the year 1641. It was unjustly not without extreme difficulty that the king could be brought to consent to his execution. He came to the house of lords, where he expressed his resolution never to employ Strafford again in any public business; but account of with regard to the treason for which he was condemned, he professed himself totally dissatisfied. The commons voted it a breach of privilege for the king to take notice of any bill depending before the house. Charles did not perceive, that his attachment to Strafford was the chief motive for the bill; and the greater proof he gave of this attachment to his favourite minister, the more inevitable did he render his destruction. The house of lords were intimidated, by popular violence, into passing the bill of attainder against the unfortunate earl. The same battery was next employed to force the king's assent. The populace flocked about Whitehall, and accompanied their demand of justice with the loudest clamours and most open menaces. A thousand idle reports of conspiracies, insurrections, and invasions, were spread abroad. On whatever side the king cast his eyes, he saw no resource nor security. All his servants, consulting their own safety rather than their master's honour, declined interfering with their advice between him and his parliament. The queen, terrified at the appearance of so great danger, pressed Charles, with tears, to satisfy his people in this demand, which it was hoped would finally content them. Archbishop Juxon alone had the courage to advise him, if he did not approve of the bill, by no means to consent to it.

Strafford, hearing of the king's irresolution and anxiety, wrote to him a letter, in which he desired his own execution, in order to give peace to the nation: and at last, after the most violent anxiety and doubt, Charles granted a commission to four noblemen, in his name, to give the royal assent to the bill; flattering himself perhaps, that as neither his will consented to the deed, nor was his hand immediately engaged in it, he was the more free from all the guilt which attended it. These commissioners he empowered at the same time to give his assent to a bill yet more fatal to himself, viz. That the present parliament should not be dissolved, prorogued, or adjourned, without their own consent.

By this last bill Charles rendered the power of his enemies perpetual, as it was already uncontrollable. His reason for this extraordinary step was, that the commons, from policy, more than necessity, had embraced the expedient of paying the two armies by borrowing money from the city. These loans they repaid afterwards by taxes levied on the people. At last the citizens, either of themselves, or by suggestion, began to start difficulties with regard to a farther loan which was demanded. "We make no scruple of trusting the parliament (said they), were we certain that the parliament was to continue till our repayment. But, in the present precarious situation of affairs, what security can be In order to obviate this objection, the above-mentioned bill was suddenly brought in, and having passed both houses with great rapidity, was at last brought to the king; who, being opprested with grief on account of the unhappy fate of Strafford, did not perceive the pernicious consequence of the bill.

All this time the commons had ruled in other respects with an uncontrollable sway. Soon after the impeachment of Strafford, Laud was accused of high treason, and committed to custody. To avoid the like fate, Lord keeper Finch and Secretary Windesbank fled, the one into Holland, the other into France. The house instituted a new species of guilt, termed delinquency: those who had exercised the powers necessary for the defence of the nation, during the late military operations, were now called delinquents. In consequence of this determination, many of the nobility and prime gentry of the nation, while only exerting, as they justly thought, the legal powers of magistracy, found themselves unexpectedly involved in this new crime of delinquency. The commons, however, by their institution, reaped this multiplied advantage; they disarmed the crown, they established the maxims of rigid law and liberty, and they spread the terror of their own authority. All the sheriffs who had formerly exacted ship money, though by the king's express command, were now declared delinquents. The farmers and officers of the customs who had been employed so many years in levying tonnage, poundage, &c., were likewise denominated criminals of the same kind, and were afterwards glad to compound for a pardon, by paying £50,000. Every discretionary or arbitrary sentence of the star-chamber and high commission courts, which from their very nature were arbitrary, underwent a severe scrutiny; and all those who had concurred in such sentences, were voted to be liable to the penalties of law. No minister of the king, no member of the council, but what found himself exposed by this determination. The judges who had formerly given judgment against Hambden for refusing to pay ship money, were accused before the peers, and obliged to find security for their appearance. Berkley, a judge of the king's bench, was seized by order of the house, even when fitting in his tribunal. The sanction of the lords and commons, as well as that of the king, was declared necessary for the confirmation of ecclesiastical canons. Monopolists and projectors, if of the king's party, were now expelled the house; but one Mildmay, a notorious monopolist, was allowed to keep his seat, because he was of the popular party. In short, the constitution was completely new-modelled; and during the first period of the transactions of this remarkable parliament, if we except Strafford's attainder, their merits in other respects so much overbalance their mistakes, as to entitle them to very ample praises from all lovers of liberty. Not only were former abuses remedied, and grievances redressed; great provision for the future was made, by excellent laws against the return of the like complaints. And if the means by which they obtained such mighty advantages favoured often of artifice, sometimes of violence; it is to be considered, that revolutions of government cannot be effected by mere force of argument and reasoning; and that, factions being once excited, men can neither so firmly regulate the tempers of others, not their own, as to ensure themselves against all exorbitancies.

Had the parliament stopped here, it had been happy for the nation; but they were now resolved to be satisfied with nothing less than the total abolition of monarchy. The king had promised to pay a visit, this summer, to his subjects in Scotland, in order to settle their government; and though the English parliament was very unfortunate with him to lay aside that journey, they could not prevail with him to much as to delay it. Having failed in this, they appointed a small committee of both houses to attend him, in order, as was pretended, to see the articles of pacification executed, but really to be spies upon the king, to extend still farther the ideas of parliamentary authority, as well as eclipse his majesty. Endeavours were even used, before Charles's departure, to have a protector of the kingdom appointed, with a power to pass laws without having recourse to the king. About this time, the Marriage concluded the marriage of the princess Mary with the prince William prince of Orange. He did not conclude this alliance without communicating his intentions to parliament, who were very well satisfied with the pro-Orangeal. They adjourned from Sept. 9th to October 20th, 1641.

Charles arrived in Scotland August 14th 1641, with Charles ar. a design to give full satisfaction if possible to these refleets lives in kingdom. Some good regulations were made; the Scottish bench of bishops, and lords of articles, were abolished; it was ordained that no man should be created a Scottish peer, who possessed not 10,000 merks (above 500l.) of annual rent in the kingdom; a law for triennial parliaments was likewise enacted; and it was ordained, that the last act of every parliament should be to appoint the time and place for holding the parliament next ensuing; the king was also deprived of that power formerly exercised, of issuing proclamations which enjoined obedience under the penalty of treason. But His greatest the most fatal blow given to royal authority, and what concessions in a manner dethroned the prince, was an article, that no member of the privy-council, in whose hands, during the king's absence, the whole administration lay, no officer of state, none of the judges, should be appointed but by advice and approbation of parliament. Charles even agreed to deprive of their seats four judges who had adhered to his interests; and their place was supplied by others more agreeable to the ruling party. Several of the covenanters were also sworn of the privy-council; and all the ministers of state, counsellors and judges, were, by law, to hold their places during life or good behaviour. The king, while in Scotland, conformed himself to the established church; he bestowed pensions and preferments on Henderson, Gillepsy, and other popular preachers: he practised every art to soften, if not to gain, his greatest enemies; the earl of Argyle was created a marquis, Lord Loudon an earl, and Lely was dignified with the title of Lord Leven. But though Charles was thus obliged to heap favours on his enemies and overlook his friends, the former were not satisfied, as believing all he did proceeded from artifice and necessity; while some of the latter were disgusted, and thought themselves ill rewarded for their past services.

Argyle and Hamilton, being seized with an apprehension, real or pretended, that the earl of Crawford and others meant to afflame them, left the parliament suddenly, and retired into the country; but, upon invitation and assurances, returned in a few days. This event, which in Scotland had no visible consequence, was commonly denominated the incident; but though the incident had no effect in Scotland, it was attended with very serious consequences in England. The English parliament immediately took the alarm; or rather probably were glad of the hint: they inflamed to the people, that the malignants, so they called the king's party, had laid a plot at once to murder them and all the goodly in both kingdoms. They applied therefore to Essex, whom the king had left general of the south of England; and he ordered a guard to attend them.

In the mean time a most dangerous rebellion broke out in Ireland, with circumstances of unparalleled horror, bloodshed, and devastation. The old Irish, by the wife conduct of James, had been fully subdued, and proper means taken for securing their dependence and subjection for the future; but their old animosity still remained, and only wanted an occasion to exert itself. This they obtained from the weak condition to which Charles was reduced, and this was made use of in the following manner.

One Roger More, a gentleman descended from an ancient Irish family, but of narrow fortune, first formed the project of expelling the English, and asserting the independence of his native country. He secretly went from chieftain to chieftain, and roused up every latent principle of discontent. He maintained a close correspondence with Lord Macguire and Sir Phelim O'Neale, the most powerful of the old Irish: and by his persuasions soon engaged not only them, but the most considerable persons of the nation, into a conspiracy; and it was hoped, the English of the pale, as they were called, or the old English planters, being all Catholics, would afterwards join the party which restored their religion to its ancient splendour and authority. The plan was, that Sir Phelim O'Neale, and the other conspirators, should begin an insurrection on one day throughout the provinces, and should attack all the English settlements; and that, on the very same day, Lord Macguire and Roger More should surprise the castle of Dublin. They fixed on the beginning of winter for the commencement of this revolt; that there might be more difficulty in transporting forces from England. Succours to themselves, and supplies of arms, they expected from France, in consequence of a promise made them by Cardinal Richelieu; and many Irish officers who had served in the Spanish troops had given assurances of their concurrence, as soon as they saw an insurrection entered upon by their Catholic brethren. News, which every day arrived from England, of the fury expressed by the commons against all Papists, struck fresh terror into the Irish nation, stimulated the conspirators to execute their fatal purpose, and assured them of the concurrence of their countrymen.

Such a propensity was discovered in all the Irish to revolt, that it was deemed unnecessary as well as dangerous to trust the secret in many hands; and though the day appointed drew nigh, no discovery had yet been made to government. The king, indeed, had received information from his ambassadors, that something was in agitation among the Irish in foreign parts; but though he gave warning to the administration in Ireland, his intelligence was entirely neglected. They were awakened from their security only that very day before the commencement of hostilities. The castle of Dublin, by which the capital was commanded, contained arms for 10,000 men, and 35 pieces of cannon, and a proportionable quantity of ammunition. Yet was this important place guarded, and that too without any care, by no greater force than 50 men. Macguire and More were already in town with a numerous band of their retainers; others were expected that night; and next morning they were to enter upon what they esteemed the easiest of all enterprises, the surprisal of the castle. O'Conolly, however, an Irishman, but a Protestant, discovered the conspiracy. The justices and council fled immediately to the castle, and reinforced the guards. The city was immediately alarmed, and all the Protestants prepared for defence. More escaped, but Macguire was taken; and Mahon, one of the conspirators, being likewise seized, first discovered to the justices the project of a general insurrection.

But though O'Conolly's discovery saved the castle from a surprisal, Mahon's confession came too late to elude the prevent the intended insurrection. O'Neale and his rebels' confederates had already taken arms in Ulster. The houses, cattle, and goods of the English were first feigned. Those who heard of the commotions in their neighbourhood, instead of deserting their habitations, and assembling together for mutual protection, remained at home in hopes of defending their property; and fell thus separately into the hands of their enemies. An universal massacre now commenced, accompanied with circumstances of unequalled barbarity. No age, sex, or condition, was spared. All connections were dissolved, and death was dealt by that hand from which protection was implored and expected. All the tortures which wanton cruelty could devise, all the lingering pains of body, the anguish of mind, the agonies of despair, could not satiate revenge excited without injury, and cruelty derived from no cause. Such enormities, in short, were committed, that though attested by undoubted evidence, they appear almost incredible. The stately buildings or commodious habitations of the planters, as if upbraiding the sloth and ignorance of the natives, were consumed with fire, or laid level with the ground; and where the miserable owners, shut up in their houses, and preparing for defence, perished in the flames, together with their wives and children, a double triumph was afforded to their insulting foes. If anywhere a number assembled together, and resolved to oppose the assailants; they were disarmed by capitulations and promises of safety, confirmed by the most solemn oaths. But no sooner had they surrendered, than the rebels, with perfidy, equal to their cruelty, made them share the fate of their unhappy countrymen. Others tempted their prisoners, by the fond love of life, to embrace their hands in the blood of friends, brothers, or parents; and having thus rendered them accomplices in their own guilt, gave them that death which they fought to shun by deferring it.

Such were the barbarities by which Sir Phelim O'Neale and the Irish in Ulster signalized their rebellion. More, shocked at the recital of these enormities, flew Britain to O'Neale's camp; but found that his authority, which was sufficient to excite the Irish to a rebellion, was too feeble to restrain their inhumanity. Soon after, he abandoned the cause, and retired to Flanders. From Ulster, the flames of rebellion diffused themselves in an instant over the other three provinces of Ireland. In all places, death and slaughter were not uncommon; though the Irish in these other provinces pretended to act with moderation and humanity. But cruel and barbarous was their humanity! Not content with expelling the English from their houses, they stripped them of their very clothes, and turned them out naked and defenceless to all the severities of the season. The heavens themselves, as if conspiring against that unhappy people, were armed with cold and tempest unusual to the climate, and executed what the sword had left unfinished. By some computations, those who perished by all these cruelties are supposed to amount to 150,000 or 200,000; but by the most reasonable and moderate, they are made to amount only to 40,000; though probably even this account is not free of exaggeration.

The English of the pale, who probably were not at first in the secret, pretended to blame the insurrection, and to detest the barbarity with which it was accompanied. By their protestations and declarations they engaged the justices to supply them with arms, which they promised to employ in defence of government. But in a little time, the interests of religion were found to be more prevalent over them than regard and duty to their native country. They chose Lord Gormontone their leader; and, joining the old Irish, rivalled them in every act of cruelty towards the English Protestants. Besides many smaller bodies, dispersed over the kingdom, the main army of the rebels amounted to 20,000 men, and threatened Dublin with an immediate siege. Both the English and Irish rebels conspired in one imposture, by which they seduced many of their countrymen. They pretended authority from the king and queen, but especially the latter, for their insurrection; and they affirmed that the cause of their taking arms was to vindicate the royal prerogative, now invaded by the puritanical parliament. Sir Phelim O'Neale, having found a royal patent in the house of Lord Caulfield, whom he had murdered, tore off the seal, and affixed it to a commission which he had forged for himself.

The king received intelligence of this insurrection while in Scotland, and immediately acquainted the Scots parliament with it. He hoped, as there had all along been such an outcry against Popery, that now, when that religion was appearing in its blackest colours, the whole nation would vigorously support him in the suppression of it. But here he found himself mistaken. The Scots considering themselves now as a republic, and conceiving hopes from the present distresses of Ireland, they resolved to make an advantageous bargain for the succours with which they should supply the neighbouring nation. Except dispatching a small body of forces, to support the Scots colonies in Ulster, they would, therefore, go no farther than to send commissioners to London, in order to treat with the parliament, to whom the sovereign power was in reality transferred. The king, too, sensible of his utter inability to subdue the Irish rebels, found himself obliged, in this exigency, to have recourse to the English parliament, and depend on their assistance for supply. He told them that the insurrection was not, in his opinion, the result of any rash enterprise, but of a formed conspiracy against the crown of England. To their care and wisdom, therefore, he said, he committed the conduct and prosecution of the war, which, in a cause so important to national and religious interests, must of necessity be immediately entered upon, and vigorously pursued.

The English parliament, now re-assembled, discomfited in each vote the same dispositions in which they had separated. Nothing less than a total abolition of the English monarchy would serve their turn. But this project it had not been in the power of the popular leaders to have executed, had it not been for the passion which seized the nation for the presbyterian discipline, and the wild enthusiasm which at that time attended it. By the difficulties and distresses of the crown, the commons, who possessed alone the power of supply, had aggrandized themselves; and it seemed a peculiar happiness, that the Irish rebellion had succeeded, at such a critical juncture, to the pacification in Scotland. That expression of the king's by which he committed to them the care of Ireland, they immediately laid hold of, and interpreted in the most unlimited sense. They had on other occasions been gradually encroaching on the executive power of the crown, which forms its principal and most natural branch of authority; but with regard to Ireland, they at once assumed it, fully and entirely, as if delivered over to them by a regular gift or assignment. And to this usurpation the king was obliged passively to submit, both because of his inability to resist, and lest he should expose himself still more to the charge of favouring the rebels; a reproach eagerly thrown upon him by the popular party as soon as they heard that the Irish pretended to act by his commission. Nay, to complete their character, while they pretended the utmost zeal against the insurgents, they took no steps for their suppression, but such as likewise gave them the superiority in those commotions which they foresaw must be soon excited in England. They levied money under pretence of the Irish expedition, but reserved it for purposes which concerned them more nearly; they took arms from the king's magazines, but still kept them with a secret intention of making use of them against himself: whatever law they deemed necessary for aggrandizing themselves, they voted, under colour of enabling them to recover Ireland; and if Charles withheld his royal assent, the refusal was imputed to those pernicious counsels which had at first excited the Popish rebellion, and which still threatened total ruin to the Protestant interest throughout his dominions. And though no force were for a long time sent over into Ireland, and very little money remitted during the extreme distresses of that kingdom; so strong was the people's attachment to the commons, that the fault was never imputed to those pious zealots, whose votes breathed nothing but death and destruction to the Irish rebels.

The conduct of the parliament towards the king now became exceedingly unreasonable, unjust, and cruel. It was thought proper to frame a general remonstrance of the state of the kingdom; and accordingly the committee, which at the first meeting of the parliament had- been chosen for that purpose, were commanded to finish their undertaking. The king returned from Scotland November 25th 1641. He was received in London with the shouts and acclamations of the populace, and with every demonstration of regard and affection. Sir Richard Gournay, lord mayor, a man of great merit and authority, had promoted these favourable dispositions; and had engaged the populace, who so lately insulted the king, and who so soon after made furious war upon him, to give him these marks of their dutiful attachment. But all the pleasure which Charles reaped from this joyful reception was soon damped by the remonstrance of the commons, which was presented to him together with a petition of the like nature. The bad counsels which he followed were there complained of; his concurrence in the Irish rebellion plainly intimated; the scheme laid for the introduction of popery and superstition was inveighed against; and for a remedy to all these evils, the king was desired to entrust every office and command to persons in whom his parliament should have cause to confide. By this phrase, which was very often repeated in all the memorials and addresses of that time, the commons meant themselves and their adherents. To this remonstrance Charles was obliged to make a civil reply, notwithstanding his subjects had transgressed all bounds of respect, and even good manners, in their treatment of their sovereign.

It would be tedious to point out every invasion of the prerogative now attempted by the commons: but finding themselves at last likely to be opposed by the nobility, who saw their own depression closely connected with that of the crown, they openly told the upper house, that "they themselves were the representatives of the whole body of the kingdom, and that the peers were nothing but individuals, who held their seats in a particular capacity; and therefore, if their lordships would not consent to acts necessary for the preservation of the people, the commons, together with such of the lords as were more sensible of the danger, must join together and represent the matter to his majesty." Every method proper for alarming the populace was now put in practice. The commons affected continual fears of destruction to themselves and to the whole nation. They excited the people by never-ceasing inquiries after conspiracies, by reports of insurrections, by feigned intelligence of invasions from abroad, and by discoveries of dangerous combinations at home, against Papists and their adherents. When Charles dismissed the guard which they had ordered during his absence, they complained; and, upon his promising them a new guard under the command of the earl of Lindsey, they absolutely refused the offer: they ordered halberts to be brought into the hall where they assembled, and thus armed themselves against those conspiracies with which they pretended they were hourly threatened. Several reduced officers, and young gentlemen of the inns of court, during this time of distress and danger, offered their service to the king. Between them and the populace there passed frequent skirmishes, which ended not without bloodshed. By way of reproach, these gentlemen gave the rabble the name of round-heads, on account of their short cropped hair; while they distinguished the others by the name of cavaliers. And thus the nation, which was before sufficiently provided with religious as well as civil causes of quarrel, was also supplied with party-names, under which the factions might rendezvous and signalize their mutual hatred.

These tumults continued to increase about Westminster and Whitehall. The cry continually resounded against bishops and rotten-hearted lords. The former especially, being easily distinguishable by their habit, and being the object of violent hatred to all the sectaries, were exposed to the most dangerous insults. The archbishop of York, having been abused by the populace, hastily called a meeting of his brethren. By his advice a protestation was drawn up and addressed to the king and the house of lords. The bishops there set the house forth, that though they had an undoubted right to sit lords, and vote in parliament, yet in coming thither they had been menaced, assaulted, affronted, by the unruly multitude, and could no longer with safety attend their duty in the house. For this reason they protested against all laws, votes, and resolutions, as null and invalid, which should pass during the time of their forced absence. This protestation, which, though just and legal, was certainly ill-timed, was signed by twelve bishops, and communicated to the king, who hastily approved of it. As soon as it was presented to the lords, that house desired a conference with the commons, whom they informed of this unexpected protestation. The opportunity was seized with joy and triumph. An impeachment of high treason was immediately sent up against the bishops, as endeavouring to subvert the fundamental law, and to invalidate the authority of the legislature. They were, on the first demand, sequestered from parliament, and committed to custody. No man in either house ventured to speak a word in their vindication: so much was every one displeased at the egregious imprudence of which they had been guilty. One person alone said, that he did not believe them guilty of high treason; but that they were stark mad, and therefore desired they might be sent to bedlam.

This was a fatal blow to the royal interest; but it soon felt a much greater from the imprudence of the king himself. Charles had long suppressed his resentment, and only strove to gratify the commons by the greatness of his concessions; but finding that all his compliance had but increased their demands, he could no longer contain. He gave orders to Herbert his attorney-general to enter an accusation of high treason, in the house of peers, against Lord Kimbolton, one of the most popular men of his party, together with five commoners, Sir Arthur Hatherig, Hollis, Hambden, Pym, and Strode. The articles were, That they had traiterously endeavoured to subvert the fundamental laws and government of the kingdom, to deprive the king of his regal power, and to impose on his subjects an arbitrary and tyrannical authority; that they had invited a foreign army to invade the kingdom; that they had aimed at subverting the very right and being of parliaments; and had actually raised and countenanced tumults against the king. Men had scarce leisure to wonder at the precipitancy and imprudence of this impeachment when they were astonished by another measure still more rash and unsupported. A sergeant at arms, in the king's name, demanded of the house the five members, and was sent back without any positive answer. This was followed by a conduct still more extraordinary. The next day, the king himself was seen to enter the house of commons alone, advancing through the hall, while all the members stood up to receive him. The speaker withdrew from his chair, and the king took possession of it. Having seated himself, and looked round him for some time, he told the house, that he was sorry for the occasion that forced him thither; that he was come in person to seize the members whom he had accused of high treason, seeing they would not deliver them up to his sergeant at arms. Then addressing himself to the speaker, he desired to know whether any of them were in the house; but the speaker, falling on his knees, replied, that he had neither eyes to see, nor tongue to speak, in that place, but as the house was pleased to direct him; and he asked pardon for being able to give no other answer. The king sat for some time, to see if the accused were present; but they had escaped a few minutes before his entry. Thus disappointed, perplexed, and not knowing on whom to rely, he next proceeded amidst the invectives of the populace, who continued to cry out, Privilege! privilege! to the common council of the city, and made his complaints to them. The common council answered his complaints by a contemptuous silence; and, on his return, one of the populace, more insolent than the rest, cried out, "To your tents, O Israel!" a watch-word among the Jews, when they intended to abandon their princes.

When the commons assembled the next day, they pretended the greatest terror; and passed an unanimous vote that the king had violated their privileges, and that they could not assemble again in the same place, till they should obtain satisfaction, and have a guard for their security. The king had retired to Windsor, and from thence he wrote to his parliament, making every concession, and promising every satisfaction in his power. But they were resolved to accept of nothing unless he would discover his advisers in that illegal measure; a condition to which, they knew, that, without rendering himself for ever vile and contemptible, he could not possibly submit.

The commons had already stript the king of almost all his privileges; the bishops were fled, the judges were intimidated: it now only remained, after securing the church and the law, that they should get possession of the sword also. The power of appointing governors and generals, and of levying armies, was still a remaining prerogative of the crown. Having therefore first magnified their terrors of Popery, which perhaps they actually dreaded, they proceeded to petition that the Tower might be put into their hands; and that Hull, Portsmouth, and the fleet, should be intrusted to persons of their choosing. These were requests, the complying with which subverted what remained of the constitution; however, such was the necessity of the times, that they were first contested, and then granted. At last, every compliance only increasing the avidity of making fresh demands, the commons desired to have a militia, raised and governed by such officers and commanders as they should nominate, under pretence of securing them from the Irish Papists, of whom they were under the greatest apprehension.

It was here that Charles first ventured to put a stop to his concessions; and that not by a refusal, but a delay. He was at that time in Dover attending the queen and the princesses of Orange, who had thought it prudent to leave the kingdom. He replied to the petition, that he had not now leisure to consider, a matter of such great importance; and therefore would defer an answer till his return. But the commons were well aware, that though this was depriving him even of the shadow of power, yet they had now gone too far to recede; and they were therefore desirous of leaving him no authority whatever, being conscious that themselves would be the first victims to its fury. They alleged, that the dangers and distempers of the nation were such as could endure no longer delay; and unless the king should speedily comply with their demands, they should be obliged, both for his safety and that of the kingdom, to embody and direct a militia by the authority of both houses. In their remonstrances to the king, they desired even to be permitted to command the army for an appointed time: which so exasperated him, that he exclaimed, "No, not for an hour." This peremptory refusal broke off all further treaty; and both sides were now resolved to have recourse to arms.

Charles, taking the prince of Wales with him, retired to York, where he found the people more loyal, and less infected with the frenzy of the times. He found his cause there backed by a more numerous party among the people than he had expected. The queen, who was in Holland, was making successful levies of men and ammunition by selling the crown-jewels. But before war was openly declared, the shadow of a negotiation was carried on, rather with a design to please the people, than with a design of reconciliation. Nay, that the king might despair of all composition, the parliament sent him the conditions on which they were willing to come to an agreement. Their demands were contained in nineteen propositions, and amounted to a total abolition of monarchical authority. They required that no man should remain in the council who was not agreeable to parliament: that no deed of the king's should have validity unless it passed the council, and was attested under their hand; and that all the officers of state should be chosen with consent of parliament; that none of the royal family should marry without consent of parliament or council; that the laws should be executed against Catholics; that the votes of Popish lords should be excluded; that the reformation of the liturgy and church-government should take place according to the advice of parliament; that the ordinance with regard to the militia be submitted to; that the justice of parliament may pass upon all delinquents; that a general pardon be granted, with such exceptions as should be advised by parliament; that the forts and castles be disposed of by consent of parliament; and that no peers be made but with consent of both houses. War on any terms was esteemed by the king and all his counsellors, preferable to so ignominious a peace. Charles accordingly resolved to support his authority by force of arms. "His towns (he said) were taken from him; his ships, his army, and his money: but there still remained to him a good cause, and the hearts of his loyal subjects; which, with God's blessing, he doubted not would recover all the rest." Collecting therefore some forces, he advanced southwards, and erected his royal standard at Nottingham.

The king found himself supported in the civil war by... by the nobility and more considerable gentry. They, dreading a total confusion of rank from the fury of the populace, inflamed themselves under the banner of their monarch; from whom they received, and to whom they communicated, their lustre. The concurrence of the bishops and church of England also increased the adherents of the king; but it may be safely affirmed, that the high monarchical doctrines so much inculcated by the clergy, had never done him any good. The bulk of the nobility and gentry who now attended the king in his distresses, breathed the spirit of liberty as well as of loyalty: and in the hopes alone of his submitting to a limited and legal government, they were willing to sacrifice their lives and fortunes.

On the other hand, the city of London, and most of the great corporations, took part with the parliament; and adopted with zeal those democratical principles on which these assemblies were founded. The example of the Dutch commonwealth, too, where liberty had so happily supported industry, made the commercial part of the nation desire to see a like form of government established in England. Many families also, who had enriched themselves by commerce, saw with indignation, that, notwithstanding their opulence, they could not raise themselves to a level with the ancient gentry; they therefore adhered to a power by whose success they hoped to acquire rank and consideration.

At first every advantage seemed to lie against the royalists. The king was totally destitute of money. London, and all the sea-ports, except Newcastle, being in the hands of parliament, they were secure of a considerable revenue; and the seamen naturally following the disposition of the ports to which they belonged, the parliament had the entire dominion of the sea. All the magazines of arms and ammunition they seized at first; and their fleet intercepted the greatest part of those sent by the queen from Holland. The king, in order to arm his followers, was obliged to borrow the weapons of the train bands, under promise of restoring them as soon as peace should be settled. The nature and qualities of his adherents alone gave the king some compensation for all the advantages possessed by his adversaries. More bravery and activity were hoped for from the generous spirit of the nobles and gentry, than from the base disposition of the multitude. And as the landed gentlemen, at their own expense, levied and armed their tenants, besides an attachment to their masters, greater force and courage were to be expected from these rustic troops than from the vicious and enervated populace of cities. Had the parliamentary forces however, exerted themselves at first, they might have easily dispossessed the small number the king had been able to collect, and which amounted to no more than 800 horse and 300 foot; while his enemies were within a few days march of him with 6000 men. In a short time the parliamentary army were ordered to march to Northampton; and the earl of Essex, who had joined them, found the whole to amount to 15,000. The king's army too was soon reinforced from all quarters; but still, having no force capable of coping with the parliamentary army, he thought it prudent to retire to Derby, and from thence to Shrewsbury, in order to countenance the levies which his friends were making in those parts. At Wellington, a day's march from Shrewsbury, he made a rendezvous of all his forces, and caused his military orders to be read at the head of every regiment. That he might bind himself by reciprocal obligations, he here professed solemnly before his whole army, that he would maintain the Protestant religion according to the church of England; that he would govern according to the known statutes and customs of the kingdom; and particularly, that he would observe inviolable the laws to which he had given his consent during this parliament, &c.

While Charles lay at Shrewsbury, he received the news of an action, the first which had happened in these parts, and wherein his party was victorious. On the appearance of commotions in England, the princes Rupert and Maurice, sons of the unfortunate elector palatine, had offered their service to the king; and the former at that time commanded a body of horse which had been sent to Worcester in order to watch the motions of Essex, who was marching towards that city: No sooner had the prince arrived, than he saw some cavalry of the enemy approaching the gates. Without delay he briskly attacked them, as they were defiling from a lane, and forming themselves. Colonel Sandys their commander was killed, the whole party routed, and pursued above a mile.

In 1642, October 23rd, happened a general engagement at Edgehill, in which, though the royalists were at first victorious, their impetuosity lost the advantage they had gained, and nothing decisive happened. Five thousand men, it is said, were found dead on the field of battle. Soon after, the king took Banbury and Reading; and defeated two regiments of his enemies at Brentford, taking 500 prisoners. Thus ended the campaign in 1642; in which, though the king had the advantage, yet the parliamentary army amounted to 24,000 men, and was much superior to his; notwithstanding which, his enemies had been so far humbled as to offer terms of peace.

In 1643, the treaty was carried on, but without any cessation of hostilities; and indeed the negociation went no farther than the first demand on each side; for the parliament, finding no likelihood of coming to an accommodation, suddenly recalled their commissioners. On the 27th of April, Reading surrendered to the parliamentary forces under the earl of Essex, who commanded a body of 18,000 men. The earl of Northumberland united in a league for the king the counties in favour of Northumberland, Cumberland, Westmorland, and the king, the bishopric; and engaged some time after other counties in the same association. The same nobleman also took possession of York, and dislodged the forces of the parliament at Tadcaster, but his victory was not decisive. Other advantages were also gained by the royalists; the most important of which was the battle of Stratton, where the poet Waller, who commanded the parliamentary army, was entirely defeated, and forced to fly with only a few horse to Bristol. This happened on the 13th of July; and was followed by the siege of that city, which surrendered to Prince Rupert on the 25th of the same month.

Though the taking of Bristol had cost the royalists dear, yet such a continual run of success had greatly dispirited the opposite party; and such confusion now prevailed at London, that some proposed to the king to march directly to that city, which it was hoped might be reduced either by an insurrection of the citizens. zens by victory or by treaty, and thus an end put to the civil disorders at once. This advice, however, was rejected, on account of the great number of the London militia; and it was resolved first to reduce Gloucester, in consequence of which the king would have the whole course of the Severn under his command. The rich and malcontent counties of the west having then lost all protection from their friends, might be enforced to pay large contributions as an atonement for their disaffection; an open communication could be preserved between Wales and these new conquests; and half the kingdom being entirely freed from the enemy, and thus united into one firm body, might be employed in re-establishing the king's authority throughout the remainder.

The siege of this city commenced August 10th; but being defended by Massey a resolute governor, and well garrisoned, made a vigorous defence. The conformation at London, however, was as great as if the enemy had been already at their gates; and in the midst of the general confusion, a design was formed by Waller of forcing the parliament to accept of some reasonable conditions of peace. He imparted his design to some others; but a discovery being made of their proceedings, he and two others were condemned to death. Waller, however, escaped with a fine of 10,000l. The city of Gloucester in the mean time was reduced to the utmost extremity; and the parliament, as their last resource, dispatched Essex with an army of 14,000 men, in order to force the king to raise the siege of that city. This he accomplished; and when he entered, found only one barrel of gun-powder left, and their whole provisions nearly exhausted. On his return to London, he was intercepted by the king's army, with whom a desperate battle ensued at Newbury, which lasted till night. Though the victory was left undecided, Essex next morning proceeded on his march, and reached London in safety, where he received the applause for his conduct he deserved. The king followed him on his march; and having taken possession of Reading after the earl left it, he there established a garrison, and straitened by that means London and the quarters of the enemy.

In the north, during the summer, the earl, now created marquis of Newcastle, had raised a considerable force for the king; and great hopes of success were entertained from that quarter. There appeared, however, in opposition to him, two men on whom the event of the war finally depended, and who began about this time to be remarked for their valour and military conduct: These were, Sir Thomas Fairfax, son to the lord of that name; and Oliver Cromwell. The former gained a considerable advantage over the royalists at Wakefield, and took General Goring prisoner; the latter obtained a victory at Gainborough over a party commanded by the gallant Cavendish, who perished in the action. But both these defeats were more than compensated by the total rout of Lord Fairfax at Atherton Moor, and the dispersion of his army, which happened on the 31st of July. After this victory, the marquis of Newcastle sat down before Hull with an army of 15,000 men; but being beaten off by a fall of the garrison, he suffered so much that he thought proper to raise the siege. About the same time, Manchester, who advanced from the eastern associated counties, having joined Cromwell and young Fairfax, obtained a considerable victory over the royalists at Horn Castle; where the two last mentioned officers gained renown by their conduct and gallantry. And though fortune had thus balanced her favours, the king's party still remained much superior in those parts of England; and had it not been for the garrison of Hull, which kept Yorkshire in awe, a conjunction of the northern forces with the army of the south might have been made, and had probably enabled the king, instead of entering on the unfortunate, perhaps imprudent enterprise of Gloucester, to march directly to London, and put an end to the war. The battle of Newbury was attended with such loss on both sides, that it put an end to the campaign of 1643, by obliging both parties to retire into winter quarters.

The event of the war being now very doubtful, the king and parliament began both of them to look for assistance from other nations. The former cast its eyes on Ireland, the latter on Scotland. The parliament of England had ever invited the Scots, from the commencement of the civil dissensions, to interpose their mediation, which they knew would be very little favourable to the king, and which for that reason he had declined. Early in the spring 1643, this offer of mediation had been renewed, with no better success than before. The commissioners were also empowered to press the king to a compliance with the presbyterian worship and discipline. But this he absolutely refused, as well as to call a parliament in Scotland; so that the commissioners, finding themselves unable to prevail in any one of their demands, returned home highly dissatisfied. The English parliament being now in great distress, gladly sent commissioners to Edinburgh, to treat of a more close confederacy with the Scotch nation. The person they principally trusted to on this occasion was Sir Henry Vane, who in eloquence, address, capacity, as well as in art and dissimulation, was not even surpassed by any one in that age so famous for active talents. By his persuasions was framed at Edinburgh the Solemn League and Covenant; which solemnly effaced all former protestations and vows taken in both league and kingdoms, and long maintained its credit and authority. In this covenant, the subscribers, besides engaging mutually to defend each other against all opponents, bound themselves to endeavour, without respect of persons, the extirpation of popery and prelacy, superstition, heresy, and profaneness; to maintain the rights and privileges of parliaments, together with the king's authority; and to discover and bring to justice all incendiaries and malignants. They vowed also to preserve the reformed religion established in the church of Scotland; but by the artifice of Vane, no declaration more explicit was made with regard to England and Ireland, than that those kingdoms should be reformed according to the word of God, and the example of the purest churches.

Great were the rejoicings among the Scots, that they should be the happy instruments of extending their mode of religion, and dissipating the profound darkness in which the neighbouring nations were involved. And being determined that the sword should carry conviction to all refractory minds, they prepared themselves with great vigilance and activity for their military enterprises; so that, having added to their other forces forces the troops which they had recalled from Ireland, they were ready about the end of the year to enter England under their old general the earl of Leven, with an army of above 20,000 men. The king, in order to secure himself, concluded a cessation of arms with the Irish rebels, and recalled a considerable part of his army from Ireland. Some Irish Catholics came over with these troops, and joined the royal army, where they continued the same cruelties and disorders to which they had been accustomed. The parliament voted, that no quarter in any action should ever be given them. But Prince Rupert, by making some reprisals, soon repressed this inhumanity.

The campaign of 1644 proved very unfortunate to the royal cause. The forces brought from Ireland were landed at Moftyn in North Wales, and put under the command of Lord Biron. They besieged and took the castles of Hawarden, Beeston, Acton, and Deddington-house. No place in Cheshire or the neighbourhood now adhered to the parliament, except Lantwich; and to this place Biron laid siege in the depth of winter. Sir Thomas Fairfax, alarmed at so great a progress, assembled an army of 4000 men in Yorkshire; and having joined Sir William Brereton, was approaching to the camp of the royalists. Biron and his soldiers, elated with successes in Ireland, entertained a most profound contempt for their enemies. Fairfax suddenly attacked their camp. The swelling of the river by a thaw divided one part of the army from another. That part opposed to Fairfax, being driven from their post, retired into the church at Acton, where being surrounded, they were all taken prisoners. The other retreated with precipitation; and thus was dissipated or rendered useless that body of forces which had come from Ireland. This happened on the 25th of January; and on the 11th of April, Colonel Bellasis was totally defeated at Selby in Yorkshire by Sir Thomas Fairfax, who had returned from Cheshire with his victorious forces. Being afterwards joined by Lord Leven, the two generals sat down before the city of York; but being unable to invest that city completely, they were obliged to content themselves with accommodating it by a loose blockade. Hopeton, having assembled a body of 14,000 men, endeavoured to break into Sussex, Kent, and the southern association, which seemed well disposed to receive him; but was defeated by Waller at Cheriton. At Newark, however, Prince Rupert totally defeated the parliamentary army which besieged that place; and thus preserved the communication open between the king's northern and southern quarters.

The great advantages the parliament had gained in the north, seemed now to second their unwarrantable enterprises, and finally to promise them success. Manchester having taken Lincoln, had united his army to that of Leven and Fairfax; and York was now closely besieged by their numerous forces. That town, though vigorously defended by the marquis of Newcastle, was reduced to the last extremity when Prince Rupert, having joined Sir Charles Lucas who commanded Newcastle's horse, hastened to its relief with an army of 20,000 men. The Scots and parliamentary generals raised the siege, and drawing up on Marston moor, proposed to give battle to the royalists. Prince Rupert approached the town by another quarter, and interposing the river Ouse between him and the enemy, safely joined his forces to those of Newcastle. The marquis endeavoured to persuade him, that having so successfully effected his purpose, he ought to be contented with the present advantages, and leave the enemy, now much diminished by their losses, and discouraged by their ill success, to dissolve by those mutual differences which had begun to take place among them. The prince, however, hurried on by his natural impetuosity, gave immediate orders for fighting. The battle was lost, the royal army entirely pushed off the field, and the train of artillery taken. Immediately after this unfortunate action, the marquis of Newcastle left the kingdom, and Prince Rupert retired into Lancashire. The city of York was surrendered in a few days, and Newcastle soon after taken by storm.

This was a fatal blow to the royal cause, and far from being balanced by an advantage gained at Croppedy bridge by the king over Waller, or even by the disarming of Essex's forces, which happened on the 1st of September. On the 27th of October, another battle was fought at Newbury, in which the royalists were worsted, but soon after retrieved their honour at Dennington castle, which finished the campaign in 1644.

In 1645, a negociation was again set on foot, and the commissioners met at Uxbridge on the 30th of January; but it was soon found impossible to come to any agreement. The demands of the parliament were exorbitant; and, what was worse, their commissioners owned them to be nothing but preliminaries. The king was required to attain, and except from a general pardon, 40 of the most considerable of his English subjects, and 19 of his Scots, together with all the Popish recusants who had borne arms for him. It was insisted that 48 more, with all the members of either house who had sat in the parliament called by the king at Oxford, all lawyers and divines who had embraced the king's party, should be rendered incapable of any office, be forbidden the exercise of their profession, be prohibited from coming within the verge of the court, and forfeit the third of their estates to the parliament. It was required, that whoever had borne arms for the king should forfeit the tenth of their estates, or if that did not suffice, the sixth, for the payment of public debts. As if royal authority were not sufficiently annihilated by these terms, it was demanded that the court of wards should be abolished; that all the considerable officers of the crown, and all the judges, should be appointed by parliament; and that the right of peace and war should not be exercised without consent of parliament. A little before the commencement of this fruitless treaty, the parliament, to show their determined resolution to proceed in the same haughty imperious method in which they had begun, brought to the block Archbishop Laud, who had long been a prisoner in the Tower, and was incapable of giving offence to any.

While the king's affairs thus went into decay in England, they seemed to revive a little in Scotland, the earl through the conduct and valour of the earl of Montrose, a young nobleman newly returned from his travels. He had been introduced to the king; but not meeting with an agreeable reception, had gone over to the covenanters, and been active in forwarding all their Being commissioned, however, by the tables, to wait upon the king while the army lay at Berwick, he was so gained by the civilities and cares of that monarch, that he thenceforth devoted himself entirely, though secretly, to his service. For attempting to form an afflication in favour of the royal cause, Montrose was quickly thrown into prison; but being again released, he found the king ready to give ear to his counsels, which were of the boldest and most daring kind. Though the whole nation of Scotland was occupied by the covenanters, though great armies were kept on foot by them, and every place guarded by a vigilant administration, he undertook by his own credit, and that of a few friends who remained to the king, to raise such commotions, as would soon oblige those malcontents to recall the forces which had so sensibly thrown the balance in the favour of parliament.

The defeat at Marston-moor had left him no hopes of any succours from England; he was therefore obliged to stipulate with the earl of Antrim, a nobleman of Ireland, for some supply of men from that country. And he himself having used various disguises, and passed through many dangers, arrived in Scotland, where he lay for some time concealed in the borders of the Highlands.

The Irish did not exceed 1100 foot, very ill armed. Montrose immediately put himself at their head; and being joined by 1300 Highlanders, attacked Lord Elcho, who lay at Perth with 6000 men, utterly defeated him, and killed 2000 of the covenanters. He next marched northwards, in order to rouse again the marquis of Huntly and the Gordons, who had taken arms before, but been suppressed by the covenanters. At Aberdeen, he attacked and entirely defeated Lord Burley, who commanded 2500 men. Montrose, however, by this victory, did not obtain the end he proposed; the marquis of Huntly showed no inclination to join an army where he was so much eclipsed by the general.

Montrose was now in a very dangerous situation. Argyle, reinforced by the earl of Lothian, was behind him with a great army. The militia of the northern counties, Murray, Rothes, and Caithness, to the number of 5000, opposed him in front, and guarded the banks of the Spey, a deep and rapid river. In order to save his troops, he turned aside into the hills; and after some marches and countermarches, Argyle came up with him at Faivy castle; and here, after some skirmishes, in which he was always victorious, Montrose got clear of a superior army, and by a quick march through these almost inaccessible mountains put himself absolutely beyond their power.

It was the misfortune of this general, that very good or very ill fortune were equally destructive of his army. After every victory his Scots soldiers went home to enjoy the spoil they had acquired; and had his army been composed of these only, he must have soon been abandoned altogether: but his Irishmen having no place to which they could retire, adhered to him in every fortune. With these, therefore, and some reinforcements of the Atholmen and Macdonalds, Montrose fell suddenly upon Argyle's country, letting loose upon it all the horrors of war. Argyle, collecting 3000 men, marched in quest of the enemy, who had retired with their plunder; and he lay at Innerlochey, supposing himself to be still at a good distance from them. The earl of Seaforth, at the head of the garrison of Inverness, and a body of 5000 new levied troops, pressed the royalists on the other side, and threatened them with total destruction. By a quick and unexpected march, Montrose hastened to Innerlochey, and presented himself in order of battle before the covenanters. Argyle alone, seized with a panic, deserted his army. They made a vigorous resistance, however; but were at last defeated and pursued with great slaughter: after which Montrose was joined by great numbers of Highlanders; Seaforth's army dispersed of itself; and the lord Gordon, eldest son of the marquis of Huntly, having escaped from his uncle Argyle, who had hitherto detained him, now joined Montrose with a considerable number of his followers, attended by the earl of Aboyne.

The council at Edinburgh, alarmed at these victories, sent for Baillie, an officer of reputation, from England; and, joining him in command with Urrey, sent them with a considerable army against the royalists. Montrose, with a detachment of 800 men, had attacked Dundee, a town extremely attached to the covenant; and having carried it by assault, had given it up to be plundered by his soldiery; when Baillie and Urrey with their whole force came upon him. He instantly called off his soldiery from the plunder; put them in order; secured his retreat by the most skilful measures; and having marched 60 miles in the face of an enemy much superior, without stopping, or allowing his soldiery the least sleep or refreshment, at last secured himself in the mountains. His antagonists now divided their forces, in order to carry on the war against an enemy who surprised them as much by the rapidity of his marches as by the boldness of his enterprises. Urrey met him with 4000 men, at Alderne; he defeats near Inverness; and trifling to his superiority in numbers (for Montrose had only 2000 men), attacked him in the post which he had chosen. Montrose, having placed his right wing in strong ground, drew the best of his forces to the other, and left no main body between them; a defect which he artfully concealed by showing a few men through trees and bushes with which that ground was covered. That Urrey might have no leisure to perceive the stratagem, he instantly led his wing to the charge, made a furious attack on the covenanters, drove them off the field, and obtained a complete victory over them. Baillie now advanced, in order to revenge Urrey's defeat; but he himself met with a like fate at Alford. Montrose, weak in cavalry, lined his troops of horse with infantry; and, after putting the enemy's horse to rout, fell with united force upon their foot, which were entirely cut in pieces, though with the loss of the gallant Lord Gordon on the part of the royalists.—Having thus prevailed in so many battles, which his vigour always rendered as decisive as they were successful, he prepared for marching into the southern provinces, in order to put a total period to the power of the covenanters, and dissipate the parliament, which with great pomp and solemnity they had ordered to meet at St Johnstone's.

While Montrose was thus signalizing his valour in Parliament, the north, Fairfax, or rather Oliver Cromwell under the name, employed himself in bringing in a new modelled. Britain. del into the parliamentary army, and throwing the whole troops into a different shape; and never surely was a more singular army established, than that which was now set at foot by the parliament. To the greatest number of the regiments chaplains were not appointed. The officers assumed the spiritual duty, and united it with their military functions. During the intervals of action, they occupied themselves in sermons, prayers, and exhortations. Rapturous ecstasies supplied the place of study and reflection; and while the zealous devotees poured out their thoughts in unpremeditated harangues, they mittook that eloquence, which to their own surprise, as well as that of others, flowed in upon them, for divine illuminations, and illaples of the Holy Spirit. Wherever they were quartered, they excluded the minister from his pulpit; and, usurping his place, conveyed their sentiments to the audience with all the authority that followed their power, their valour, and their military exploits, united to their apparent zeal and fervour. The private soldiers were seized with the same spirit; and in short, such an enthusiasm seized the whole army as was perhaps scarce ever equalled.

The royalists ridiculed this fanaticism of the parliamentary armies, without being sensible how much reason they had to dread it. They were at this time equal, if not superior, in number to their enemies; but so licentious, that they were become more formidable to their friends than their enemies. The commanders were most of them men of dissolute characters; in the west especially, where Goring commanded, universal spoil and havoc were committed; and the whole country was laid waste by the rapine of the army; so that the most devoted friends both to the church and state wished there for such success to the parliamentary forces as might put an end to these disorders.

The natural consequence of such enthusiasm in the parliamentary army, and licentiousness in that of the king, was, that equal numbers of the latter would no longer maintain their ground against the former. This appeared in the decisive battle of Naseby, where the forces were nearly equal; but after an obstinate engagement, Charles was entirely defeated, 500 of his officers and 4000 private men made prisoners, all his artillery and ammunition taken, and his infantry totally dispersed; so that scarce any victory could be more complete.

After this fatal battle, the king retired first to Hereford, then to Abergavenny; and remained some time in Wales, from the vain hope of raising a body of infantry in these quarters, already harassed and exhausted. His affairs now, however, went to ruin in all quarters. Fairfax retook Leicester on the 17th of June. On the 10th of July, he raised the siege of Taunton; and the royalists retired to Lampart, an open town in the county of Somerset. Here they were attacked by Fairfax, and beat from their post, with the loss of 300 killed and 1400 taken prisoners. This was followed by the loss of Bridgewater, which Fairfax took three days after; making the garrison, to the number of 2600 men, prisoners of war. He then reduced Bath and Sharpshorn; and on the 11th of September Bristol was surrendered to him by Prince Rupert, though a few days before he had boasted in a letter to Charles, that he would defend the place for four months. This so enraged the king, that he immediately recalled all the prince's commissions, and sent him a pass to go beyond sea.

The Scots in the meantime, having made themselves masters of Carlisle after an obstinate siege, marched southwards and invested Hereford; but were obliged to raise the siege on the king's approach. And this was the last glimpse of success that attended his arms. Having marched to the relief of Chester, which was anew besieged by the parliamentary forces under Colonel Jones, his rear was attacked by Pointz, and an engagement immediately ensued. While the fight was continued with great obstinacy, and victory seemed to incline to the royalists, Jones fell upon them from the other side, and defeated them with the loss of 600 killed and 1000 taken prisoners. The king with the remains of his army fled to Newark; and Charles from thence escaped to Oxford, where he shut himself up during the winter season.

After the surrender of Bristol, Fairfax and Cromwell having divided their forces, the former marched westwards in order to complete the conquest of Devonshire and Cornwall; the latter attacked the king's garrisons which lay to the east of Bristol. Nothing was able to stand before these victorious generals; every town was obliged to submit, and every body of troops that pretended to resist were utterly defeated. At last, Montrose news arrived, that Montrose himself, after some more defeat, was defeated; and thus the only hope of the royal party was destroyed.

When that brave general descended into the southern counties, the covenanters, assembling their whole force, met him with a numerous army, and gave him battle at Kilflyth. Here he obtained his most memorable victory: 6000 of the covenanters were killed on the spot, and no remains of an army left them in Scotland. Many noblemen, who secretly favoured the royal cause, now declared openly for it, when they saw a force able to support them. The marquis of Douglas, the earls of Annandale and Hartfield, the lords Fleming, Seton, Madderly, Carnegy, with many others, flocked to the royal standard. Edinburgh opened its gates, and gave liberty to all the prisoners there detained by the covenanters. Among the rest was Lord Ogilvy, son to Airly, whose family had contributed very much to the victory gained at Kilflyth.

—David Leslie was detached from the army in England, and marched to the relief of his distressed party in Scotland. Montrose advanced still further to the south, allured by the vain hopes, both of raising to arms the earls of Hume, Traquair, and Roxburgh, who had promised to join him; and of obtaining from England some supply of cavalry, in which he was very deficient. By the negligence of his scouts, Leslie, at Philiphaugh in the Forest, surprised his army, much diminished in numbers from the defection of the Highlanders, who had retired to the hills, according to custom, to secure their plunder. After a sharp conflict, in which Montrose exerted great valour, his forces were routed by Leslie's cavalry, and he himself forced to fly to the mountains.

Nothing could be more affecting than the situation in which the king now was. He now resolved to grant the parliament their own terms, and sent them repeated. repeated messages to this purpose, but they never deigned to make him the least reply. At last, after reproaching him with the blood spilt during the war, they told him that they were preparing some bills, to which, if he would consent, they would then be able to judge of his pacific inclinations. Fairfax, in the mean time, was advancing with a victorious army in order to lay siege to Oxford; and Charles, rather than submit to be taken captive and led in triumph by his insolent subjects, resolved to give himself up to the Scots, who had never testified such implacable animosity against him, and to trust to their loyalty for the rest. After passing through many bye-ways and crossroads, he arrived in company with only two persons, Dr Hudson and Mr Athburnham, at the Scots camp before Newark, and discovered himself to Lord Leven their general.

The reception he met with was such as might be expected from these infatuated bigots, destitute of every principle of reason, honour, or humanity. Instead of endeavouring to alleviate the distresses of their sovereign, they suffered him to be insulted by the clergymen. They immediately sent an account of his arrival to the English parliament, and they as quickly entered into a treaty with the Scots about delivering up their prisoner. The Scots thought this a proper time for the recovery of their arrears due to them by the English. A great deal was really due them, and they claimed much more than actually belonged to them. At last, after various debates between them and the parliament, in which they pretended to great honour, and inflicted upon many punctilios, it was agreed, that, upon payment of 400,000l. the Scots should deliver up the king to his enemies; and this was cheerfully complied with. Thus the Scots justly fell under the censure of having fold their king, who had thrown himself upon their mercy; a flatter peculiar to the nation, and unparalleled in history either ancient or modern. It must, however, be acknowledged, that the infamy of this bargain had such an influence on the Scots parliament, that they once voted that the king should be protected and his liberty insisted on. But the general assembly interposed; and pronounced, that as he had refused to take the covenant which was pressed on him, it became not the godly to concern themselves about his fortunes. In consequence of this, the parliament were obliged to retract their vote. The king, being delivered over to the English commissioners, was conducted under a guard to Holdenby in the county of Northampton, where he was very rigorously confined; his ancient servants being dismissed, himself debarred from visits, and all communication cut off with his friends or family.

The civil war being now over, the king abolished his followers from their allegiance, and the parliament had now no enemy to fear but their own troops. From this quarter their danger only arose; and it was not long before they found themselves in the same unfortunate situation to which they had reduced the king. The majority of the house were presbyterians, but the majority of the army were independents. The former, soon after the retreat of the Scots, seeing everything reduced to obedience, proposed to disband a considerable part of the army, and send the rest over to Ireland. This was by no means relished, and Cromwell took care to heighten the dissatisfaction. Instead of preparing to disband, therefore, the soldiers resolved to petition; and they began by desiring an indemnity, ratified by the king, for any illegal actions which they might have committed during the war. The commons voted that this petition tended to introduce mutiny, &c., and threatened to proceed against the promoters of it as enemies to the state and disturbers of the public peace. The army now began to set up for a military themselves. In opposition to the parliament at Westminster, a military parliament was formed. The principal officers formed a council to represent the body of peers; the soldiers elected two men out of each company to represent the commons, and these were called the agitators of the army; and of this assembly Cromwell took care to be a member. The new parliament soon found many grievances to be redressed; and specified some of the most considerable. The commons were obliged to yield to every request, and the demands of the agitators rose in proportion. The commons accused the army of mutiny and sedition; the army retorted the charge, and alleged that the king had been deposed only to make way for their usurpations. Cromwell, in the mean time, who secretly conducted all the measures of the army, while he excused against their violence, resolved to seize the king's person. Accordingly a party of 500 horse appeared at Holmby castle, under the command of one Joyce, originally a taylor, but now a cornet; and by this man was the king conducted to the army, who were hastening to their rendezvous at Triplo-heath near Cambridge. Next day Cromwell arrived among them where he was received with acclamations of joy, and immediately invested with the supreme command.

The commons now saw the designs of the army; but it was too late, all resistance was become vain; Cromwell advanced with precipitation, and was in a few days at St Alban's. Even submission was now to no purpose; the army still rose in their demands, in proportion as these demands were gratified, till at last they claimed a right of modelling the whole government, and settling the nation.

Cromwell began with accusing eleven members of the house, the very leaders of the presbyterian party, as guilty of high treason, and being enemies of the army. The commons were willing to protect them; but the army insisting on their dismission, they voluntarily left the house. At last the citizens of London, finding the constitution totally overturned, and a military despotism beginning to take place, instead of the kingly one they were formerly afraid of, began to think seriously of suppressing the insolence of the troops. The common council assembled the militia of the city; the works were manned; and a manifesto published, aggravating the hostile intentions of the army. Finding that the commons, in compliance with the request of the army, had voted that the city militia should be disbanded, the multitude rose, besieged the door of the house, and obliged them to reverse that vote they had so lately passed. The assembly was, of consequence, divided into two parties; the greater part siding with the citizens; but the minority, with the two speakers at their head, were for encouraging the army. Accordingly the two speakers, with 62 of the members secretly... secretly retired from the house, and threw themselves under the protection of the army, who were then at Hounslow-heath. They were received with shouts and acclamations; their integrity was extolled; and the whole force of the soldiery, to the number of 20,000 men, now moved forward to reinstate them in their places.

In the mean time, the part of the house which was left, resolved to resist the encroachments of the army. They chose new speakers, gave orders for enlisting troops, ordered the train-bands to man the lines; and the whole city boldly resolved to resist the invasion. But this resolution only held while the enemy was at a distance; for when Cromwell appeared, all was obedience and submission; the gates were opened to the general, who attended the two speakers and the rest of the members peaceably to their habitations. The eleven impeached members being accused as causes of the tumult, were expelled; and most of them retired to the continent. The mayor, sheriff, and three aldermen, were sent to the Tower; several citizens, and officers of the militia, were committed to prison; the lines about the city levelled with the ground; and the command of the Tower was given to Fairfax.

It now only remained to dispose of the king, who remained a prisoner at Hampton-court. The independent army, at the head of whom was Cromwell, on one hand; and the presbyterians, in the name of both houses, on the other; treated with him separately in private. He had sometimes even hopes, that, in these struggles for power, he might have been chosen mediator in the dispute; and he expected that the kingdom at last, being sensible of the miseries of anarchy, would of its own accord be hushed into its former tranquil condition. At this time he was treated with some flattering marks of distinction; he was permitted to converse with his old servants; his chaplains were permitted to attend him, and celebrate divine service their own way. But the most exquisite pleasure he enjoyed was in the company of his children, with whom he had several interviews. The meeting on these occasions was so pathetic, that Cromwell himself, who was once present, could not help being moved, and was heard to declare, that he never beheld such an affecting scene before. But these instances of respect were of no long continuance. As soon as the army had gained a complete victory over the house of commons, the king was treated not only with the greatest disrespect, but even kept in continual alarms for his own personal safety. The consequence of this was, that Charles at last resolved to withdraw himself from the kingdom. Accordingly, on the 11th of November 1647, attended only by Sir John Berkeley, Ashburnham, and Leg, he privately left Hampton-court; and his escape was not discovered till near an hour after; when those who entered his chamber, found on the table some letters directed to the parliament, to the general, and to the officer who had attended him. All night he travelled through the forest, and arrived next day at Titchfield, a seat of the earl of Southampton, where resided the countess dowager, a woman of honour, to whom the king knew he might safely entrust his person. Before he arrived at this place, he had gone to the sea-coast; and expressed great anxiety that a ship which he seemed to look for had not arrived. He could not hope to remain long concealed at Titchfield; the question was, what measure should next be embraced? In the neighbourhood lay the isle of Wight, of which Hammond was governor. This man was entirely dependent on Cromwell, which was a very unfavourable circumstance: yet, because the isle of governor was nephew to Dr Hammond the king's favourite chaplain, and had acquired a good reputation in the army, it was thought proper to have recourse to him in the present exigence, when no other rational expedient could be thought of. Ashburnham and Berkeley were dispatched to the island. They had orders not to inform Hammond of the place where the king lay concealed, till they had first obtained a promise of him not to deliver up his majesty, even though the parliament and army should require him; but restore him to his liberty, if he could not protect him. The promise would have been but a slender security: yet even without exacting it, Ashburnham imprudently, if not treacherously, brought Hammond to Titchfield; and the king was obliged to put himself into his hands, and to attend him to Caribroke castle in the isle of Wight, where, though he was received with great demonstrations of respect and kindness, he was in reality a prisoner.

While the king continued in this forlorn situation, Cromwell found himself upon the point of losing all in the fruits of his former schemes, by having his own from the principles turned against himself. Among the Independents, who in general were for no ecclesiastical subordination, a set of men grew up called levellers, who disallowed all subordination whatsoever, and declared that they would have no other chaplain, king, or general, but Jesus Christ. Though this would have gone down very well with Cromwell, as long as it was only directed against his enemies, he did not so well relish it when applied to himself. Having intimation that the levellers were to meet at a certain place, he unexpectedly appeared before them at the head of his red regiment, which had hitherto been deemed invincible. He demanded in the name of God, what these meetings and murmurings meant? he expostulated with them upon the danger and consequence of their precipitant schemes, and desired them immediately to depart. Instead of obeying, however, they returned an insolent answer; wherefore, rushing on them in a fury, he laid two of them dead at his feet. His guards dispersing the rest, he caused several of them to be hanged upon the spot, and sent others to London; and thus dissipated a faction no otherwise criminal than in having followed his own example.

Cromwell's authority was greatly increased by the last-mentioned action; but it became irresistible in consequence of a new and unexpected addition to his forces. The Scots, perhaps ashamed of the reproach of having sold their king, and stimulated farther by the Independents, who took all occasions to mortify them, raised an army in his favour, and the chief command was given to the earl of Hamilton: while Langdale, who professed himself at the head of the more bigotted party who had taken the covenant, marched at the head of his separate body, and both invaded the north of England. Though these two armies amounted to above 20,000 men, yet Cromwell at the head of 8000 of his hardy veterans, feared not to give them battle. He attacked them one after another; routed and defeated them; took Hamilton prisoner; and, following his blow, entered Scotland, the government of which he settled entirely to his satisfaction. An insurrection in Kent was quelled by Fairfax with the same ease; and nothing but success attended all this usurper's attempts.

During these contentions, the king, who was kept a prisoner at Carilbrooke castle, continued to negotiate with the parliament for settling the unspeakable calamities of the kingdom. The parliament now saw no other method of destroying the military power, but to depress it by the kingly. Frequent proposals for an accommodation passed between the captive king and the commons; but the great obstacle which had all along stood in the way, still kept them from agreeing. This was the king's refusing to abolish Episcopacy, though he consented to alter the liturgy. However, the treaty was still carried on with vigour, and the parliament for the first time seemed in earnest to conclude their negotiations. But all was now too late. The victorious army, with Cromwell at their head, advanced to Windsor, and with furious remonstrances began to demand vengeance on the king. The unhappy monarch had been lately sent under confinement to that place; and from thence he was now conveyed to Hurst castle in Hampshire, opposite to the isle of Wight. The parliament in the meantime began to issue ordinances for a more effectual opposition to these military encroachments, when they were astonished by a message from Cromwell, that he intended paying them a visit next day with his whole army; and in the mean time ordering them to raise him £40,000, on the city of London.

The commons, though destitute of all hopes of prevailing, had still the courage to resist, and to attempt in the face of the whole army to finish the treaty they had begun with the king. They had taken into consideration the whole of his concessions; and though they had formerly voted them unsatisfactory, they now renewed the consultation with great vigour. After a violent debate which lasted three days, it was carried in the king's favour by a majority of 129 against 83, that his concessions were a foundation for the houses to proceed upon in settling the affairs of the nation. This was the last attempt in his favour; for the next day Colonel Pride, at the head of two regiments, blockaded the house; and seizing in the passage 41 members of the Presbyterian party, sent them to a low room belonging to the house, that passed by the denomination of Hell. Above 160 members more were excluded; and none were allowed to enter but the most furious and determined of the Independents, in all not exceeding 60. This atrocious invasion of parliamentary rights commonly passed by the name of Pride's Purge, and the remaining members were called the Rump. These soon voted, that the transactions of the house a few days before were entirely illegal, and that their general's conduct was just and necessary.

Nothing now remained, to complete the wickedness of this parliament, but to murder the king. In this assembly, therefore, composed of the most obscure citizens, and officers of the army, a committee was appointed to bring in a charge against the king; and on their report, a vote passed declaring it treason in a king to levy war against his parliament. It was therefore resolved, that a high court of justice should be appointed, to try his majesty for this new invented treason. For form's sake, they desired the concurrence of the few remaining lords in the upper house; but there was virtue enough left in that body unanimously to reject the proposal. The commons, however, were not to be stopped by so small an obstacle. They voted that the concurrence of the house of lords was unnecessary, and that the people were the origin of all just power. To add to their zeal, a woman of Herefordshire, illuminated by prophetical visions, desired admittance, and communicated a revelation she pretended to have received from heaven. She assured them that their measures were consecrated from above, and ratified by the sanction of the Holy Ghost. This intelligence gave them great comfort, and much confirmed them in their present resolutions.

Colonel Harrison, the son of a butcher, was commanded to conduct the king from Hurst castle to Windsor, and from thence to London. His afflicted subjects, who ran to have a sight of their sovereign, were greatly affected at the change that appeared in his face and person. He had permitted his beard to grow; his hair was become venerably gray, rather by the pressure of anxiety than the hand of time; while the rest of his apparel bore the marks of misfortune and decay. He had long been attended by an old decrepid servant whose name was Sir Philip Warwick, who could only deplore his master's fate without being able to revenge his cause. All the exterior symbols of sovereignty were now withdrawn, and his attendants had orders to serve him without ceremony. He could not, however, be persuaded that his adversaries would bring him to a formal trial; but he every moment expected to be despatched by private assassination.

From the 6th to the 20th of January was spent in making preparations for this extraordinary trial. The court of justice consisted of 133 persons named by the commons; but of these never above 70 met upon the trial. The members were chiefly composed of the principal officers of the army, most of them of very mean birth, together with some of the lower house, and a few citizens of London. Bradshaw a lawyer was chosen president; Coke was appointed solicitor for the people of England; Dorislaus, Steele, and Ask, were named assistants. The court sat in Westminster-hall. When the king was brought forward before the court, he was conducted by the mace-bearer to a chair placed within the bar. Though long detained a prisoner, and now produced as a criminal, he still maintained the dignity of a king. His charge was then read by the solicitor, accusing him of having been the cause of all the bloodshed which had flowed since the commencement of the war; after which Bradshaw directed his discourse to him, and told him that the court expected his answer.

The king began his defence with declining the authority of the court. He represented, that having been engaged in treaty with two houses of parliament, and having finished almost every article, he expected a different treatment from what he had now received. He perceived, he said, no appearance of an upper house, which was necessary to constitute a just tribunal. He alleged that he was himself the king, and and fountain of law, and consequently could not be tried by laws to which he had never given his assent; that having been intrusted with the liberties of the people, he would not now betray them by recognizing a power founded in usurpation; that he was willing, before a proper tribunal, to enter into the particulars of his defence; but that before them he must decline any apology for his innocence, lest he should be considered as the betrayer of, and not a martyr for, the constitution. Bradshaw, in order to support the authority of the court, insisted, that they had received their authority from the people, the source of all right. He pressed the king not to decline the authority of the court that was delegated by the commons of England, and interrupted and overruled him in his attempts to reply. In this manner the king was three times produced before the court, and as often persisted in declining its jurisdiction. The fourth and last time he was brought before this self-created tribunal, as he was proceeding thither, he was insulted by the soldiers and the mob, who cried out, "Justice! justice! Execution! execution!" but he continued undaunted. His judges having now examined some witnesses, by whom it was proved that the king had appeared in arms against the forces commissioned by parliament, they pronounced sentence against him. He seemed very anxious at this time to be admitted to a conference with the two houses, and it was supposed that he intended to resign the crown to his son; but the court refused compliance, and considered his request as an artifice to delay justice.

The behaviour of Charles under all these instances of low-bred malice was great, firm, and equal. In going through the hall from this execrable tribunal, the soldiers and rabble were again instigated to cry out Justice and execution! They reviled him with the most bitter reproaches. Among other insults, one miscreant presumed to spit in the face of his sovereign. He patiently bore their insolence: "Poor souls (cried he), they would treat their generals in the same manner for sixpence." Those of the populace who still retained the feelings of humanity expressed their sorrow in sighs and tears. A soldier more compassionate than the rest could not help imploring a blessing on his royal head. An officer overhearing him, struck the honest centinel to the ground before the king; who could not help saying, that the punishment exceeded the offence.

At his return to Whitehall, Charles desired permission of the house to see his children, and to be attended in his private devotions by Dr Juxon late bishop of London. These requests were granted, and also three days to prepare for execution. Every night between his sentence and execution, the king slept sound as usual, though the noise of the workmen employed in framing the scaffold continually resounded in his ears. The fatal morning being at last arrived, he rose early; and calling one of his attendants, he bade him employ more than usual care in dressing him, and preparing him for so great a solemnity. The street before Whitehall was the place destined for his execution; for it was intended that this should increase the severity of his punishment. He was led through the banqueting house to the scaffold adjoining to that edifice, attended by his friend and servant Bishop Juxon, a man of the same mild and steady virtues with his master. The scaffold, which was covered with black, was guarded by a regiment of soldiers under the command of Colonel Tomlinson; and on it were to be seen the block, the axe, and two executioners in masks. The people, in crowds, stood at a greater distance. The king surveyed all these solemn preparations with calm composure; and, as he could not expect to be heard by the people at a distance, he addressed himself to the few persons who stood round him. He there justified his own innocence in the late fatal wars: he observed, that he had not taken arms till after the parliament had shown him the example; and that he had no other object in his warlike preparations, than to preserve that authority entire which had been transmitted to him by his ancestors. But, though innocent towards his people, he acknowledged the equity of his execution in the eyes of his Maker: he owned that he was justly punished for having consented to the execution of an unjust sentence against the earl of Strafford. He forgave all his enemies; exhorted the people to return to their obedience, and acknowledge his son as his successor; and signified his attachment to the Protestant religion as professed by the church of England. So strong was the impression made by his dying words on those who could hear him, that Colonel Tomlinson himself, to whose care he had been committed, acknowledged himself a convert. At one blow his head was severed from his body. The other executioner then, holding up the head, exclaimed, "This is the head of a traitor."

It is impossible to describe the grief, indignation, and astonishment, which took place not only among the nation of spectators, who were overwhelmed with a flood of sorrow, but throughout the whole nation, as soon as the report of this fatal execution was conveyed to them. Each blamed himself either with active disloyalty to the king, or a passive compliance with his destroyers. The very pulpits that used to resound with insolence and sedition were now bedewed with tears of unfeigned repentance; and all united in their detestation of those dark hypocrites, who, to satisfy their own enmity, involved a whole nation in the guilt of treason.—Charles was executed on the 30th of January 1649, in the 42nd year of his age, and 24th of his reign. He was of a middling stature, robust, and well proportioned. His visage was pleasant, but melancholy; and it is probable that the continual troubles in which he was involved might have made that impression on his countenance.

It being remarked, that the king, the moment before he stretched out his neck to the executioner, had the king in said to Juxon, with a very earnest accent, the single word REMEMBER, great mysteries were supposed to be concealed under that word; and the generals vehemently insisted with the prelate that he should inform them of the king's meaning. Juxon told them, that the king, having frequently charged him to inculcate on his son the forgiveness of his murderers, had taken this opportunity in the last moment of his life, when his commands, he supposed, would be regarded as sacred and inviolable, to reiterate that desire; and that his mild spirit thus terminated its present course by an act of benevolence to his greatest enemies.

The dissolution of the monarchy in England soon followed the death of the monarch. When the peers of the kingdom on the day appointed in their adjournment, they entered upon business; and sent down some votes to the the commons, of which the latter deigned not to take the least notice. In a few days after, the commons voted, that the house of lords was useless and dangerous; for which reason it was abolished. They voted it high reason to acknowledge Charles Stuart, son of the late king, as successor to the throne. A great seal was made; on one side of which were engraven the arms of England and Ireland, with this inscription: "The great seal of England." On the reverse was represented the house of commons sitting, with this motto: "On the first year of freedom, by God's blessing restored, 1649." The forms of all public business were changed from being transacted in the king's name, to that of the keepers of the liberties of England. The court of king's bench was called the court of public bench. Nay, so cautious on this head, it is said, were some of the republicans, that, in reciting the Lord's prayer, they would not say, "thy kingdom," but "thy commonwealth, come." The king's statue in the exchange was thrown down; and on the pedestal these words were inscribed: Exit tyrannus, regum ultimus; "The tyrant is gone, the last of the kings." The commons, it is said, intended to bind the princess Elizabeth apprentice to a button-maker; the duke of Gloucester was to be taught some other mechanical employment: but the former soon died of grief, as is supposed, for her father's tragic end; the latter was sent beyond sea by Cromwell. The commons next proceeded to punish those who had been most remarkable for their attachment to their late sovereign. The duke of Hamilton, Lord Capel, and the earl of Holland, were condemned and executed; the earl of Norwich and Sir John Owen were also condemned, and afterwards pardoned. These executions irritated the Scots: their loyalty began to return; and the insolence of the independents, with their victories, inflamed them still more. They determined, therefore, to acknowledge Prince Charles for their king, but at the same time to abridge his power by every limitation which they had attempted to impose on his father.

Charles, after the death of his father, having passed into some time at Paris, and finding no likelihood of assistance from that quarter, was glad to accept of any conditions. The Scots, however, while they were thus professing loyalty to their king, were nevertheless cruelly punishing his adherents. Among others, the brave marquis of Montrose was taken prisoner, as he endeavoured to raise the Highlanders in the royal cause; and being brought to Edinburgh, was hanged on a gibbet 30 feet high, then quartered, and his limbs stuck up in the principal towns of the kingdom. Yet, notwithstanding all this severity, Charles ventured into Scotland, and had the mortification to enter the gate of Edinburgh where the limbs of that faithful adherent were still exposed.

The young king soon found that he had only escaped from that quarter, changed his exile for imprisonment. He was surrounded and incessantly importuned by the fanatical clergymen, who having brought royalty under their feet, were resolved to keep it still subservient, and to trample upon it with all the contumely of upstarts. Charles pretended to give ear to their discourses; but, however, made an attempt to escape. He was overtaken and brought back; when he owned the greatness of his fault, and testified his repentance for what he had done. Cromwell, in the mean time, who had been appointed by the parliament to command the army in Ireland, prosecuted the war in that kingdom with his usual success. He had to encounter the royalists commanded by the duke of Ormond, and the native Irish led on by O'Neale. These troops he quickly overcame; and most of the towns, intimidated by his cruelty, opened their gates at his approach. He was on the point of reducing the whole kingdom, when he was recalled by the parliament to defend his country against the Scots, who had raised a considerable army in support of the royal cause.

On the return of Cromwell to England, he was chosen commander in chief of the parliamentary forces, in the room of Fairfax, who declined opposing the presbyterians. The new general immediately set forward for Scotland with an army of 16,000 men, where he was opposed by General Leffly, who formed an excellent plan for his own defence. This prudent commander, knowing his men to be inferior in valour and discipline, however superior in numbers, to those of Cromwell, kept himself carefully in his intrenchments. At last Cromwell was drawn into a very disadvantageous post near Dunbar, where his antagonist waited deliberately to take advantage of him. From this imminent danger, however, he was delivered by the madness of the Scots clergy. They, it seems, had been wrestling in prayer with the Lord night and day, and at last fancied that they had obtained the superiority. Revelations were made to them, that the heretical army, together with Agag their general, would be delivered into their hands. Upon the assurances of these visions, they obliged their general to descend into the plain, and give the English battle. When Cromwell saw this mad action, he assured his followers, that the Lord had delivered them into his hands, and ordered his army to sing psalms, as if already certain of victory. The Scots, though double the number of the English, were soon put to flight, and pursued with great slaughter, while Cromwell did not lose in the action above 40 men.

After this defeat, Charles put himself at the head of the remains of his army; and these he further strengthened by the royalists, who had been for some time excluded from his service by the covenanters. He was so closely pursued by Cromwell, however, that he soon found it impossible to maintain his army. Observing, therefore, that the way was open to England, he immediately directed his march towards that country, where he expected to be reinforced by all the royalists in that part of the kingdom. In this, however, he was deceived: the English, terrified at the name of his opponent, dreaded to join him. But his mortification was greatly increased, when at Worcester he was informed that Cromwell was marching with hasty strides from Scotland with an army of 40,000 men. This news was scarcely arrived, when Cromwell himself was there. He fell upon the town on all sides: the whole Scots army feared as was either killed or taken prisoners; and the king himself, Worcester, having given many proofs of personal valour, was obliged to fly.

The young king now entered upon a scene of adventure the most romantic that can be imagined. After his hair was cut off, the better to disguise his person, he worked for some days in the habit of a peasant, cutting faggots in a wood. He next made an attempt to retire into Wales, under the conduct of one Pendrel, a poor farmer, who was sincerely attached to his cause. In this attempt, however, he was disappointed; every path being guarded to prevent their escape. Being obliged to return, he met one Colonel Carlefs, who had escaped the carriage at Worcester. In his company the king was obliged to climb a spreading oak; among the thick branches of which they spent the day together, while they heard the foldiers of the enemy in pursuit of them below. From thence he passed with imminent danger, feeling all the varieties of famine, fatigue, and pain, till he arrived at the house of Colonel Lane, a zealous royalist in Staffordshire. There he deliberated about the means of escaping into France; and Bristol being supposed the proper port, it was resolved that he should ride thither before this gentleman's sister, on a visit to one Mrs Norton, who lived in the neighbourhood of that city. During this journey, he every day met with persons whose faces he knew, and at one time passed through a whole regiment of the enemy's army.

When they arrived at Mrs Norton's, the first person they saw was one of his own chaplains sitting at the door and amusing himself with seeing people play at bowls. The king, after having taken proper care of his horse in the stable, was shown to an apartment which Mrs Lane had provided for him, as it was said he had the ague. The butler, however, being sent to him with some refreshment, no sooner beheld his face, which was very pale with anxiety and fatigue, than he recollected his king and master; and falling on his knees, while the tears streamed down his cheeks, cried out, "I am rejoiced to see your majesty." The king was alarmed; but made the butler promise that he would keep the secret from every mortal, even from his master; and the honest servant punctually obeyed him.

No ship being found that would for a month set sail from Bristol either for France or Spain, the king was obliged to go elsewhere for a passage. He therefore repaired to the house of Colonel Wyndham in Dorsetshire, where he was cordially received. His mother, a venerable matron, seemed to think the end of her life nobly rewarded in having it in her power to give protection to her king. She expressed no dissatisfaction at having lost three sons and one grandchild in the defence of his cause, since she was honoured in being instrumental in his own preservation.

Pursuing from thence his journey to the sea-side, he once more had a very narrow escape at a little inn, where he set up for the night. The day had been appointed for a solemn fast; and a fanatical weaver, who had been a soldier in the parliamentary army, was preaching against the king in a little chapel fronting the house. Charles, to avoid suspicion, was himself among the audience. It happened that a smith, of the same principles with the weaver, had been examining the horses belonging to the passengers, and came to assure the preacher, that he knew by the fashion of the shoes, that one of the strangers' horses came from the north. The preacher immediately affirmed, that this horse could belong to no other than Charles Stuart, and instantly went with a constable to search the inn. But Charles had taken timely precautions, and left the inn before the constable's arrival.

At Shoreham, in Sussex, a vessel was at last found, in which he embarked. He was known to so many, that if he had not set sail, at that critical moment, it had been impossible for him to escape. After 41 days to France, concealment, he arrived safely at Fecamp in Normandy. No less than 40 men and women had at different times been privy to his escape.

Cromwell in the mean time returned in triumph; Cromwell and his first care was to depose the Scots, on account of their having withdrawn the work of the gospel, as he called it. An act was passed for abolishing royalty in province, Scotland, and annexing that kingdom as a conquered province to the English commonwealth. It was empowered, however, to send some members to the English parliament. Judges were appointed to distribute justice; and the people of that country, now freed from the tyranny of the ecclesiastics, were not much dissatisfied with the government.

All parts of the British dominions being now reduced to perfect subjection to the parliament, they next resolved to chastise the Dutch, who had given but very slight causes of complaint. It happened that one Dr Doriflaus, who was of the number of the late king's judges, being sent by the parliament as their envoy to Holland, was assassinated by one of the royal party who had taken refuge there. Some time after, also, Mr St John, appointed their ambassador to that court, was insulted by the friends of the prince of Orange. These were thought sufficient reasons for a declaration of war against the Hollander by the commonwealth of England. The parliament's chief dependence lay in the activity and courage of Blake their admiral; who, though he had not embarked in naval command till late in life, yet surpassed all that went before him in courage and dexterity. On the other side, the Dutch opposed to him their famous admiral Van Tromp, to whom their country never since produced an equal. Many were the engagements between those celebrated admirals, and various was their success. Several dreadful encounters served rather to show the excellency of the admirals than to determine their superiority. At last the Dutch, who felt many great disadvantages by the loss of their trade, and by the total suspension of their fisheries, were willing to treat of a peace. The parliament, however, gave but a very unfavourable answer. They studied to keep their navy on foot as long as they could; rightly judging, that while the force of the nation was exerted by sea, it would diminish the formidable power of Cromwell by land.

This great aspirer, however, quickly perceived their designs; and therefore, secure in the attachment of the army, resolved to seize the sovereign power. He persuaded the officers to present a petition for payment of arrears, and redress of grievances. His orders were obeyed: a petition was drawn up and presented, in which the officers, after demanding their arrears, desired the parliament to consider how many years they had sat, and what pretensions they had formerly made of their designs to new-model the house, and establish freedom on its broadest basis. They alleged, that it was now full time to give place to others; and however meritorious their actions might have been, yet the rest of the nation had some right, in their turn, to manifest their patriotism in defence of their country. The house was highly offended: they appointed a committee to Britain. to prepare an act, ordaining that all persons who presented such petitions for the future should be deemed guilty of high treason. To this the officers made a very warm remonstrance, and the parliament as angry a reply. Cromwell, being informed of this altercation, started up in the utmost seeming fury, and turning to Major Vernon, cried out, "that he was compelled to do a thing that made the very hair of his head stand on end." Then hastening to the house with 300 soldiers, and with the marks of violent indignation on his countenance, he entered, took his place, and attended to the debates for some time. When the question was ready to be put, he suddenly started up, and began to load the parliament with the vilest reproaches for their tyranny, ambition, oppression, and robbery of the public. Upon which, stamping with his foot, which was the signal for the soldiers to enter, the place was immediately filled with armed men. Then, addressing himself to the members, "For shame (said he), get you gone. Give place to honest men; to those who will more faithfully discharge their trust. You are no longer a parliament; I tell you, you are no longer a parliament; the Lord has done with you." Sir Harry Vane exclaimed against this conduct, "Sir Harry! (cries Cromwell with a loud voice), O Sir Harry Vane! The Lord deliver me from Sir Harry Vane!" Taking hold then of one of the members by his cloak, "Thou art a whoremaster," cries he; to another, "Thou art an adulterer;" to a third, "Thou art a drunkard;" to a fourth, "Thou art a glutton, &c." It is you (continued he to the members), that have forced me upon this. I have sought the Lord night and day, that he would rather slay me than put me upon this work." Then pointing to the mace, "Take away that bauble," cried he: after which, turning out all the members, and clearing the hall, he ordered the doors to be locked; and putting the keys in his pocket, returned to Whitehall.

Thus the whole civil and military power centered in Cromwell, who by this bold transaction became, in effect, king of Great Britain, with uncontrollable authority. Being willing, however, to amuse the people with the form of a commonwealth, he proposed to give his subjects a parliament; but such a one as should be altogether obedient to his commands. For this purpose it was decreed, that the sovereign power should be vested in 144 persons, under the denomination of a parliament; and he undertook to make the choice himself. The persons pitched upon were the lowest, meanest, and most ignorant among the citizens, and the very dregs of the fanatics. To go further than others in the absurdities of fanaticism was the chief qualification upon which each of these valued himself. Their very names, borrowed from scripture, and rendered ridiculous by their misapplication, served to show their excess of folly. One of them particularly, who was called Prais God Barebone, a canting leather-feller, gave his name to this odd assembly, and it was called Barebone's Parliament. They were chiefly composed of Antinomians; a sect that, after receiving the spirit, supposed themselves incapable of error; and the fifth monarchy-men, who every hour expected Christ's second coming on earth. They began by choosing eight of their tribe to seek the Lord in prayer, while the rest calmly sat down to deliberate upon the suppression of the clergy, the universities, and courts of justice; and instead of all this, it was their intention to substitute the law of Moses.

It was impossible such a legislature as this could Who are a-stand; even the vulgar began to exclaim against it, and again turned Cromwell himself to be ashamed of their absurdities. He had carefully chosen many persons among them who were entirely devoted to his interests, and these he commanded to dismiss the assembly. These accordingly met by concert earlier than the rest of their fraternity; and observing to each other that this parliament had sat long enough, they hastened to Cromwell, with Rous their speaker at their head, and into his hands resigned the authority with which he had invested them. Cromwell accepted their resignation with pleasure: but being told that some of their number were refractory, he sent Colonel White to clear the house of such as ventured to remain there. They had placed one Moyer in the chair by the time that the colonel had arrived; and he being asked by the colonel, What did they there? Moyer replied very gravely, That they were seeking the Lord. "Then you may go elsewhere (cried White); for, to my certain knowledge, the Lord hath not been here these many years."

The shadow of a parliament being thus dissolved, the Cromwell officers, by their own authority, declared Cromwell protector of the commonwealth of England. The protector mayor and aldermen were sent for to give solemnity to his appointment, and he was instituted into his new office at Whitehall, in the palace of the kings of England. He was to be addressed by the title of Highness; and his power was proclaimed in London, and other parts of the kingdom. It was now, indeed, in a great measure necessary that some person should take the supreme command; for affairs were brought into such a situation, by the furious animosities of the contending parties, that nothing but absolute power could prevent a renewal of former bloodshed and confusion.

The government of the kingdom was adjusted in the following manner. A council was appointed, which the government was not to exceed 21, nor to be under 13 persons. These were to enjoy their offices for life, or during good behaviour; and, in case of a vacancy, the remaining members named three, of whom the protector chose one. The protector was appointed the supreme magistrate of the commonwealth, with such powers as the king was possessed of. The power of the sword was vested in him jointly with the parliament when sitting, or with the council at other times. He was obliged to summon a parliament once every three years, and to allow them to sit five months without adjournment. A standing army was established of 20,000 foot and 10,000 horse; and funds were assigned for their support. The protector enjoyed his office for life; and on his death, the place was to be supplied by the council. Of all these clauses the standing army was sufficient for Cromwell's purpose; for, while possessed of that instrument, he could mould the rest of the constitution to his pleasure at any time. He chose his council from among his officers, who had been the companions of his dangers and victories, to each of whom he assigned a pension of 1000l. a-year. He took care to have his troops, upon whose fidelity he depended for support, paid a month in advance; the magazines were also well provided, and the public treasure managed with frugality. and care; while his activity, vigilance, and resolution, were so well exerted, that he discovered every conspiracy against his person, and every plot for an insurrection, before they took effect.

Thus Cromwell continued to govern, though without assuming the title of king, in as absolute a manner as the most despotic prince in Europe. As he was feared at home, so he made himself respected abroad. The Dutch, having been humbled by repeated defeats, were obliged to sue for peace. Cromwell obliged them to pay deference to the British flag. He compelled them to abandon the interests of the king, to pay £3,000 as an indemnification for former expenses, and to restore to the English East India Company a part of those dominions which they had been deprived of by the Dutch during the former reign. The ministry of France thought proper to pay deference to the imperious character of the protector; and he having lent that court a body of 6,000 men to attack the Spanish dominions in the Netherlands, who obtained a signal victory, the French put Dunkirk into his hands as a reward for his attachment. By means of the celebrated admiral Blake* he humbled Spain prodigiously, as also the Algerines and Tunisians. Penn and Venables, two other admirals, made an attempt on the island of Hispaniola; but failing of this, they fled to Jamaica, which was surrendered to them without a blow. Yet so little was thought of the importance of this conquest, that, on their return, the two admirals were committed to the Tower, on account of the failure of the principal object of their equipment.

It is not to be supposed that a numerous standing army could be maintained, and so many foreign wars carried on, without incurring extraordinary expenses. The protector's revenues were so much exhausted, that he was obliged to have recourse to methods which he probably would not have chosen, had he not been driven to them by necessity. One or two conspiracies entered into by the royalists, which were detected and punished, served him as a pretence to lay a heavy tax upon all that party, of the tenth penny of all their possessions. In order to raise this oppressive imposition, ten major-generals were instituted, who divided the whole kingdom into so many military jurisdictions. These men had power to subject whom they pleased to this tax, and to imprison such as denied their jurisdiction. Under colour of these powers they exercised the most arbitrary authority; the people had no protection against their exactions; the very mask of liberty was thrown off, and all property was at the disposal of a military tribunal. It was in vain that the nation cried out for a free parliament. Cromwell assembled one in consequence of their clamours; but as speedily dissolved it when he found it refractory to his commands. At last, as parliaments were always held in such estimation by the people, he resolved to give them one, but such as should be entirely of his own choosing, and chiefly composed of his creatures. Left any of a different complexion should enter the house, guards were placed at the door, and none admitted but such as produced a warrant from his council.

The principal design of convening this assembly was, that they should offer him the crown, with the title of king, and all the other ensigns of royalty. His creatures, therefore, took care to infuse the confusion there was in legal proceedings, without the name of a king; that no man was acquainted with the extent or limits of the present magistrates authority, but those of a king had been well ascertained by the experience of ages. The motion was at last formally made in the house, easily carried through, and nothing was now wanting but Cromwell's own consent to have his name enrolled among the kings of England. This consent, however, he never had resolution enough to give. His doubts continued for some days; and the conference carried on with the members who made him the offer, so far as it is on his part intelligible, seems to argue that he was desirous of being compelled to accept the which he offers; however, the conference ended in his total refusal.

With all these proffered honours, and with all his despotic power, the situation of Cromwell was far from being enviable. Perhaps no situation, however mean, or loaded with contempt, could be more truly distressful than his, at the time the nation was loading him with congratulations and addresses. He had at last rendered himself hateful to every party, and he owed his safety to their mutual hatred and diffidence of one another. His arts of dissimulation were exhausted; none could be deceived by them; even those of his own party and principles disdaining the use to which he had converted his zeal and professions. Though the whole nation filently detested his administration, he had not been completely wretched if he could have found domestic consolation. But even his own family had embraced republican principles, with so much vehemence, that they could not without indignation behold him invested with uncontrollable power; and Mrs Claypole, his favourite daughter, upbraided him, on her deathbed, with all the crimes which led him to trample on the throne. To add to all this, not only were conspiracies formed against him, but he was at last taught, upon reasoning principles, that his death was not only desirable, but his assassination would be meritorious. A book was published by Colonel Titus, a man who had formerly been attached to his cause, entitled Killing no Murder. Of all the pamphlets that appeared at that time, or perhaps of those that have since appeared, this was the most eloquent and masterly. Cromwell read it, and is said never to have smiled afterwards.

The usurper now found, that the grandeur to which he had sacrificed his former tranquillity was only an inlet to fresh inquietudes. He was haunted with perpetual fears of assassination. He wore armour under his clothes, and always kept pistols in his pockets. His aspect was clouded by a settled gloom, and he regarded every stranger with suspicion. He was always attended by a numerous guard, and travelled in a hurry. He never returned from any place by the road he went; and never slept above three nights together in the same chamber. At last he was delivered from this life and death of horror and anxiety by a tertian ague, of which he died September 3, 1658, after having usurped the government nine years.

Oliver Cromwell was succeeded in his office of protector by his son Richard, who immediately called a Cromwell parliament. To this assembly the army presented a remonstrance, desiring some person for their general in whom they could confide. The house voted such meetings ings and remonstrances unlawful: upon which the officers, surrounding Richard's house, forced him to dissolve the parliament; and soon after he signed an abdication of the government. His younger brother Henry, who had been appointed to the command in Ireland, followed Richard's example, and resigned his commission without striking a blow.

The officers, thus left at liberty, resolved to restore the rump parliament as it was called, consisting of that remnant of a parliament which had condemned Charles. They were no sooner reinstated in their authority, however, than they began to humble the army by cashiering some of the officers, and appointing others on whom they could have more dependence. The officers immediately resolved to dissolve the assembly. Lambert, one of the general officers, drew up a chosen body of troops; and placing them in the streets which led to Westminster-hall, when the speaker Lenthall proceeded in his carriage to the house, he ordered the horses to be turned, and very civilly conducted him home. The other members were likewise intercepted; and the army returned to their quarters to observe a solemn fast, which generally either preceded or attended their outrages. A committee was then elected, of 23 persons; of whom seven were officers. These they pretended to invest with sovereign authority; and a military government was established, which gave the nation a prospect of endless servitude and tyranny without redress.

Upon hearing that the officers had by their own authority dissolved the parliament, General Monk, who was then in Scotland with 8000 veteran troops, protested against the measure, and resolved to defend the national privileges. As soon as he put his army in motion, he found himself eagerly fought after by all parties; but so cautious was he of declaring his mind, that, till the very last, it was impossible to know which side he designed to take. A remarkable instance of this cautious behaviour was, that, when his own brother came to him with a message from Lord Granville in the name of the king, he refused all conversation with him upon hearing that he had told his errand to Mr Price, the general's own chaplain, and a man of known probity and honour.

Hearing that the officers were preparing an army to oppose him, Monk amused them with negotiations; and the people, finding themselves not entirely defenceless, began to declare for a free parliament. The Rump, finding themselves invited also by the navy and part of the army, again ventured to resume their seats, and to thunder votes in their turn against the officers and that party of the army by which they had been ejected. Without taking any notice of Lambert, they sent orders to the troops to repair immediately to the garrisons appointed for them. The soldiers obeyed; and Lambert at last found himself deserted by his whole army. Monk in the meantime proceeded with his army to London. The gentry, on his march, flocked round him with addresses, expressing their desire of a new parliament; but that general, still continuing his inflexible taciturnity, at last came to St Albans, within a few miles of the capital, leaving all the world in doubt as to his motives and designs. Here he sent the parliament a message, desiring them to remove such forces as remained in London to country quarters. Some of the regiments willingly obeyed this order; and such as did not, Monk turned out by force; after which he took up his quarters with his army in Westminster. The house voted him thanks for his services; he desired them to call a free parliament; and this soon inspired the citizens to refuse submission to the present government. They resolved to pay no taxes until the Westminister members formerly excluded by Colonel Pride should be replaced. For this they were punished by Monk, at the desire of the parliament. He arrested 11 of the most obnoxious of the common-council; broke the gates and portcullises; and, having exposed it to the scorn and contempt of all who hated it, he returned in triumph to his quarters at Westminster. The next day, however, he made an apology for this conduct, and promised for the future to co-operate with the mayor and common council in such schemes as they should approve.

The commons were now greatly alarmed. They tried every method to gain off the general from his new alliance. Some of them even promised to invest him with the dignity of supreme magistrate, and to support his usurpation. But Monk was too just, or too wise, to hearken to such wild proposals; he resolved to restore the secluded members, and by their means to bring about a new election.

The restoration of the expelled members was easily effected; and their number was so much superior to that of the Rump, that the chiefs of this last party now thought proper to withdraw in their turn. The restored members began with repealing all those orders by which they had been expelled. They renewed and enlarged the general's commission; fixed a proper stipend for the support of the fleet and army; and, having passed these votes, they dissolved themselves, and gave orders for the immediate assembling of a new parliament. Meanwhile, Monk new-modelled his army to New purpose he had in view. Some officers, by his direction, presented him with an address, in which they promised to obey implicitly the orders of the ensuing parliament. He approved of this engagement, which he ordered to be signed by all the different regiments; and this furnished him with a pretence for dismissing all the officers by whom it was rejected.

In the midst of these transactions, Lambert, who had been confined in the Tower, escaped from his prison, and began to raise forces; and as his activity and principles were sufficiently known, Monk took the earliest precautions to oppose his measures. He dispatched against him Colonel Ingoldby, with his own regiment, before Lambert had time to assemble his dependents. That officer had taken possession of Daventry with four troops of horse; but the greater part of them joined Ingoldby; to whom he himself surrendered, not without exhibiting strong marks of pusillanimity.

All this time Monk still persisted in his reserve; nor would he intrust his secret intentions with any person, except one Morrice, a gentleman of Devonshire. He was of a sedentary and studious disposition; and with him alone did the general deliberate on the great and dangerous enterprise of the restoration. Sir John Granville, who had a commission from the king, applied for access to the general; but he was desired to communicate his business to Morrice. Granville refused, though twice urged, to deliver his message to any but the general himself: so that Monk, now finding he could de- pend on this minister's secrecy, opened to him his whole intentions; but with his usual caution, refused to commit anything to paper. In consequence of these, the king left the Spanish territories, where he very narrowly escaped being detained at Breda by the governor, under pretence of treating him with proper respect and formality. From thence he retired to Holland, where he resolved to wait further advice.

The new parliament being assembled, Sir Harbottle Grimstone was chosen speaker, a man known to be a royalist in his heart. The affections of all were turned towards the king; yet such were their fears, and such dangers attended a freedom of speech, that no one dared for some days to make any mention of his name. At length Monk gave directions to Anneley, president of the council, to inform them that one Sir John Granville, a servant of the king's, had been sent over by his majesty, and was now at the door with a letter to the house of commons. This message was received with the utmost joy. Granville was called in, the letter read, and the king's proposals immediately accepted of. He offered a general amnesty to all persons whatsoever, and that without any exceptions but what should be made by parliament. He promised to indulge scrupulous consciences with liberty in matters of religion; to leave to the examination of parliament the claims of all such as possessed lands with contested titles; to confirm all these concessions by act of parliament; to satisfy the army under General Monk with respect to their arrears, and to give the same rank to his officers when they should be enlisted in the king's army.

In consequence of this good agreement between king and parliament, Montague the English admiral waited on his majesty to inform him that the fleet expected his orders at Scheveling. The duke of York immediately went on board, and took the command as lord high admiral. The king embarked, and landing at Dover, was received by the general whom he tenderly embraced. He entered London in 1660, on the 29th of May, which was his birthday; and was attended by an innumerable multitude of people, who testified their joy by the loudest acclamations.

Charles II. was 30 years of age at the time of his restoration. Being naturally of an engaging countenance, and professed of an open and affable disposition, he became the favourite of all ranks of his subjects. They had now felt the miseries of anarchy, and in proportion to these miseries was the satisfaction they felt on the accession of their young monarch. His first measures were calculated to give universal satisfaction. He seemed desirous of losing the memory of past animosities, and of uniting every party in affection for their prince and country. He admitted into his council the most eminent men of the nation, without regard to former distinctions. The presbyterians shared this honour equally with the royalists. Calamy and Baxter, presbyterian clergymen, were even made chaplains to the king. Admiral Montague was created earl of Sandwich, and General Monk duke of Albemarle. Morrice, the general's friend, was created secretary of state. But what gave the greatest contentment to the nation was the judicious choice which the king at first made of his principal ministers and favourites. Sir Edward Hyde, created earl of Clarendon, was prime minister and chancellor. The marquis, created duke of Ormond, was steward of the household; the earl of Southampton high-treasurer; Sir Edward Nicholas secretary of state. These men, united together in the strictest friendship, and combining in the same laudable inclinations, supported each other's credit, and pursued the interests of the public.

The parliament having been summoned without the king's consent, received at first only the title of a convention; and it was not till after an act passed for that purpose, that they were acknowledged by the name of parliament. Both houses owned the guilt of the former rebellion, and gratefully received in their own name, and in that of all the subjects, his majesty's gracious pardon and indemnity. The king had before promised an indemnity to all criminals, but such as should be excepted by parliament: he now issued a proclamation, declaring, that such of the late king's judges as did not surrender themselves within 14 days should receive no pardon. Nineteen surrendered themselves; some were taken in their flight; others escaped beyond sea. The peers seemed inclined to great severity on this occasion; but were restrained by the king, who in the most earnest terms pressed the act of general indemnification.

After repeated solicitations, the act of indemnity Regicides passed both houses, with the exception of those who punished, had an immediate hand in the king's death. Even Cromwell, Ireton, and Bradshaw, though dead, were considered as proper objects of resentment: their bodies were dug from their graves; dragged to the place of execution; and, after hanging some time, buried under the gallows. Of the rest who sat in judgment on the late monarch's trial, some were dead, and some thought worthy of pardon. Ten only, out of 80, were doomed to immediate destruction; and these were enthusiasts who had all along acted from principle, and who, in the general spirit of rage excited against them, showed a fortitude that would have done honour to a better cause.

This was all the blood that was shed at the restoration. The rest of the king's judges were reprieved, and afterwards dispersed into several prisons. The army was disbanded, that had for so many years governed the nation; prelacy, and all the ceremonies of the church of England, were restored; at the same time that the king pretended to preserve the air of moderation and neutrality. In fact, with regard to religion, Charles, in his gayer hours, was a professed deist; but in the latter part of his life he shewed an inclination to the Catholic persuasion, which he had strongly imbibed in his infancy and exile.

On the 13th of September this year, died the young duke of Gloucester, a prince of great hopes. The king the duke of was never so deeply affected by any incident in his life. Gloucester. The princess of Orange, having come to England, in order to partake of the joy attending the restoration of her family, with whom she lived in great friendship, soon after sickened and died. The queen-mother paid a visit to her son, and obtained his consent to the marriage of the princess Henrietta with the duke of Orleans, brother to the French king. The parliament having met on the 6th of November, and carried on business with the greatest unanimity and dispatch, were dissolved by the king on the 29th of December Parliament 1660. During During the reign of Charles II, the spirit of the people seemed to take a turn quite opposite to that in the time of Charles I. The latter found his subjects animated with a ferocious though ignorant zeal for liberty. They knew not what it was to be free, and therefore imagined that liberty consisted in throwing off entirely the royal authority. They gained their point: the unhappy monarch was dethroned and murdered; but instead of liberty, they found themselves involved in much worse tyranny than before. Being happily freed from this tyranny by the restoration, they ran into the contrary extreme; and instead of an unbounded spirit of opposition, there was nothing now to be found but an unbounded spirit of submission; and through the slavish submissions and concessions of the people of this reign, Charles found means to render himself at last almost quite absolute, and to govern without requiring, or indeed without having any occasion for parliament.

A like revolution took place with regard to religious matters. During the former reigns a spirit of the most gloomy enthusiasm had overspread the whole island, and men imagined that the Deity was only to be pleased by their denying themselves every social pleasure, and refusing everything that tended to make life agreeable. The extreme hypocrisy of Cromwell and his associates, and the absurd conduct of others, showed that this was not religion; but, in avoiding this error, they ran into one equally dangerous; and everything religious or serious was disdained. Nothing but riot and dissipation took place everywhere. The court set them the example; nothing but scenes of gallantry and festivity were to be seen; the horrors of the late war became the subject of ridicule; the formality of the sectaries was displayed on the stage, and even laughed at from the pulpit. In short, the best mode of religion now was to have as little as possible; and to avoid not only the hypocrisy of the sectaries, but even the common duties of morality.

In the midst of this riot and dissipation, the old and faithful followers of the royal family were left unrewarded. Numbers who had fought both for the king and his father, and who had lost their whole fortunes in his service, still continued to pine in want and oblivion; while in the mean time their persecutors, who had acquired fortunes during the civil war, were permitted to enjoy them without molestation. The wretched royalists petitioned and murmured in vain; the monarch fled from their expostulations to scenes of mirth and festivity; and the act of indemnity was generally said to have been an act of forgiveness to the king's enemies, and of oblivion to his friends.

In 1661, the Scotch and English parliaments seemed to vie with each other in their protestations to the king. In England, monarchy and episcopacy were raised to the greatest splendor. The bishops were permitted to resume their seats in the house of peers; all military authority was acknowledged to be vested in the king. He was empowered to appoint commissioners for regulating corporations, and expelling such members as had intruded themselves by violence, or professed principles dangerous to the constitution. An act of uniformity was passed, by which it was required that every clergyman should be re-ordained, if he had not before received episcopal ordination; that he should declare his consent to every thing contained in the book of Common Prayer, and should take the oath of canonical obedience. In consequence of this law, above 2000 of the presbyterian clergy resigned their curacies at once. In Scotland the right of the king was asserted in the fullest and most positive terms to be hereditary, divine, and indefeasible. His power was extended to the lives and possessions of his subjects, and from his original grant was said to come all that they enjoyed. They voted him an additional revenue of 40,000l.; and all their former violences were treated with a degree of the utmost detestation.

This intoxication of loyalty, however, began soon to wear off. The king's profusion and extravagance disgusted in his pleasures, together with his indolence in administration, furnished opportunities of making very disadvantageous comparisons between him and Oliver Cromwell. These animosities were heightened by the ejected clergy, especially when they saw Dunkirk, which had been acquired during the usurper's vigorous administration, sold to the French for 40,000l., and that merely to supply the king's extravagance. From this time (August 17, 1662) Charles found himself perpetually opposed, and his parliaments granted supplies much more reluctantly than before.

A few months before, the continual exigencies of marriage the king had forced him to conclude a marriage with the infanta of Portugal for the sake of her portion, which was 500,000l. in money, together with the fortresses of Tangier in Africa, and of Bombay in the East Indies. The chancellor Clarendon, the dukes of Ormond and Southampton, urged many reasons against this match, particularly the likelihood of her never having any children; but all their objections could not prevail, and therefore Clarendon set himself to promote it as far as lay in his power. Still, however, the king's necessities were greater than his supplies. He therefore resolved to sacrifice his minister the great Clarendon to the resentment of the parliament, to whom he was become obnoxious, in order to procure some more supplies for himself. In 1663, an extraordinary supply was demanded: the king sent for the commons, on the 12th of June, to Whitehall. He complained of their inattention; and by acquainting them of a conspiracy to seize the castle of Dublin, he hoped to furnish a reason for demanding a present supply. Four subsidies were immediately granted, and the clergy in convocation followed the example of the commons. On this occasion the earl of Bristol ventured to impeach the chancellor in the house of peers; but as he did not support his charge, the affair was dropped for the present.

With a view probably of having the money to be employed for that purpose in his hands, Charles was induced to declare war against the Dutch in 1664. In this war the English, under the command of Sir Robert Holmes, expelled the Dutch from Cape Corfe castle on the coast of Africa, and likewise seized on their settlements of Cape Verd and the isle of Grecce. Sailing from thence to America, the admiral possessed himself of Nova Belgia, since called New York; and which has ever since continued subject to Britain. On the other hand, De Ruyter, the Dutch admiral, dispossessed the English of all their settlements in Guinea except Cape Corfe. He afterwards sailed to America, where he he attacked Barbadoes and Long Island, but was repulsed. Soon after, the two most considerable fleets of each nation met; the one under the duke of York, to the number of 114 sail; the other commanded by Opdam admiral of the Dutch navy, of nearly equal force. The engagement began at four in the morning, and both sides fought with equal intrepidity. The duke of York was in the hottest part of the engagement, and behaved with great spirit and composure, while many of his lords and attendants were killed beside him. In the heat of the action the Dutch admiral's ship blew up; which so discouraged and disheartened them, that they fled towards their own coast, having 30 ships sunk and taken, while the victors lost only one. This success of the English so much excited the jealousy of the neighbouring states, that France and Denmark immediately resolved to protect the republic from such formidable enemies. De Ruyter the great Dutch admiral, on his return from Guinea, was appointed, at the head of 76 sail, to join the duke of Beaufort the French admiral, who it was supposed was then entering the British channel from Toulon. The duke of Albemarle and Prince Rupert now commanded the British fleet, which did not exceed 74 sail. Albemarle detached Prince Rupert with 20 ships to oppose the duke of Beaufort; against which piece of rashness Sir George Ayscue protested in vain. The fleets thus engaging upon unequal terms, a most memorable battle ensued. The first day, the Dutch admiral Evertsen was killed by a cannon-ball, one of their ships was blown up, and three of the English ships taken; the combatants were parted by darkness. The second day they renewed the battle with incredible fury. Sixteen fresh ships joined the Dutch; and the English were so shattered, that their fighting ships were reduced to 28. Upon retreating towards their own coast, the Dutch followed them; where another dreadful conflict was beginning, but parted by the darkness of the night as before. The morning of the third day the English continued their retreat, and the Dutch their pursuit. Albemarle came to the desperate resolution of blowing up his own ship rather than submit to the enemy, when he found himself happily reinforced by Prince Rupert with 16 ships of the line. By this time it was night; and the next day the fleets came again to a close combat, which was continued with great violence, till they were parted by a mist. Sir George Ayscue, having the misfortune to strike on the Galoper sands, was taken, with a ship of 100 guns.

Both sides claimed the victory, but the Dutch certainly had the advantage in this engagement. A second, however, equally bloody, happened soon after, with larger fleets on both sides, commanded by the same admirals. In this the Dutch were vanquished; but they were soon in a condition to face their enemies, by the junction of Beaufort the French admiral. The Dutch fleet appeared in the Thames, conducted by their great admiral. The English were thrown into the utmost consternation: a chain had been drawn across the river Medway; and some fortifications had been added to the forts along the bank. But all these were unequal to the present force: Sheerness was soon taken; the Dutch passed forward and broke the chain, though fortified by some ships sunk by Albemarle's orders. Destroying the shipping in their passage, they still advanced, with six men of war and five fire-ships, as far as Upnor castle, where they burned three men of war. The whole city of London was in consternation; it was expected that the Dutch might fail up next tide to London bridge, and destroy not only the shipping, but even the buildings of the metropolis. The Dutch, however, were unable to prosecute that project from the failure of the French who had promised them assistance. Spreading therefore an alarm along the coast, and having insulted Norwich, they returned to their own coasts.

During these transactions abroad, happened a great plague and plague at London, which destroyed 100,000 of the inhabitants. This calamity was soon followed by another, still more dreadful if possible. A fire broke out in a baker's house in Pudding-lane near the bridge, and spread with such rapidity, that no efforts could extinguish it till it laid in ashes the most considerable part of the city. This calamity, though it reduced thousands to beggary, proved in the end both beneficial and ornamental to the city. It rose from its ruins in greater beauty than ever; the streets being widened, and the houses built of brick instead of wood, became thus more wholesome and secure. In so great a calamity it is remarkable that not a single life was lost.

These complicated misfortunes did not fail to excite many murmurs among the people: the blame of the fire was laid on the Papists: the Dutch war was exclaimed against as unprofitful and unnecessary, as being an attempt to humble that nation who were equal enemies to Popery with themselves. Charles himself also began to be sensible, that all the ends for which he had undertaken the Dutch war were likely to be entirely frustrated. Instead of being able to lay up money for himself, the supplies of parliament had hitherto been so scanty, that he found himself considerably in debt. A treaty therefore was set on foot, which was concluded at Breda on the 21st of July 1667. By this treaty Holland the only advantage gained by Britain was, the cession concluded of the colony of New York. It was therefore judged disgraceful, and the blame of it thrown upon the unhappy earl of Clarendon. Along with this, he was charged with the sale of Dunkirk; the bad payment of infracted, the feasts; the disgrace by the Dutch fleet; and his own ambition. His daughter, while yet in Paris, had commenced an amour with the duke of York; and under a solemn promise of marriage had admitted him to her bed. Her lover, however, either of his own accord, or through the persuasions of his brother Charles, afterwards married her; and this was imputed as a crime to Clarendon. On these accusations, the king, who on account of his rigid virtue had never much loved this nobleman, ordered the feasts to be taken from him, and given to Sir Orlando Bridgemen. Clarendon was again impeached; and though the charges were manifestly frivolous, yet so strong was the popular torrent against him, that he thought proper to withdraw into France. Soon after, the king formed an alliance with Holland and Sweden, in order to prevent the French king from completing his conquest of the Netherlands. The greatest part of this country he had already subdued, when he was unexpectedly stopped by this league; in which it was agreed by the contracting powers, powers, that they would constitute themselves arbiters of the differences between France and Spain, and check the exorbitant pretensions of either.

The king now began to act in a very arbitrary manner. He had long wished to extend his prerogative, and to be able to furnish himself with whatever sums he might want for his pleasures, and therefore was most likely to be pleased with those ministers who could flatter both his wishes at once. These he found in Clifford, Ashley, Buckingham, Arlington, and Lauderdale, a junto distinguished by the name of the cabal; a word formed by the initials of their names. The first effects of their advice was a secret alliance with France, and a rupture with Holland. Soon after this, the duke of York declared himself a Papist; and liberty of conscience was proclaimed to all sectaries, whether dissenters or Papists: a proclamation was issued containing very rigorous clauses in favour of pressing; another full of menaces against those who should speak undutifully of his majesty's measures; and even against those who heard such discourses, unless they informed in due time against the offenders. All these things gave very great and just offence to the people; but they were especially alarmed at the alliance with France, and justly afraid of the treachery of that nation.

On the 28th of May 1672, the English fleet under the duke of York was surprized by the Dutch in Southwold bay. About eight in the morning began a most furious engagement. The gallant Sandwich, who commanded the English van, drove his ship into the midst of the enemy, beat off the admiral that ventured to attack him, sunk another ship that attempted to board him, and three fire-ships that offered to grapple with him. Though his vessel was torn with shot, and out of 1000 men there only remained 400, he still continued to fight. At last, a fire-ship, more fortunate than the rest, having laid hold of his vessel, her destruction became inevitable, and the earl himself was drowned in attempting to swim to some other ship. Night parted the combatants; the Dutch retired, and were not followed by the English. The loss sustained by the two maritime powers was nearly equal; but the French suffered very little, not having entered into the heat of the engagement. It was even supposed that they had orders for this conduct, and to spare their own ships, while the Dutch and English should weaken each other by their mutual animosities.

The combined powers were much more successful against the Dutch by land. Louis conquered all before him, crossed the Rhine, took all the frontier towns of the enemy, and threatened the new republic with a final destruction. Terms were proposed to them by the two conquerors. Louis offered them such as would have deprived them of all power of resisting an invasion from France by land. Those of Charles exposed them equally to every invasion by sea. At last the murmurs of the English at seeing this brave and industrious people, the supporters of the Protestant cause, totally sunk and on the brink of destruction, were too loud not to reach the king. He was obliged to call the parliament, to take the sense of the nation upon his conduct; and he soon saw how his subjects stood affected.

The parliament met on the 24th of February 1673. They began with repressing some of the king's extraordinary stretches of prerogative, and taking means for uniformity in religious matters. A law was passed entitled the Tref act, imposing an oath on all who should enjoy any public benefit. Besides the taking the oaths of allegiance, and the king's supremacy, they were obliged to receive the sacrament once a year in the established church, and to abjure all belief in the doctrine of transubstantiation. As the dissenters also had seconded the efforts of the commons against the king's declaration of indulgence to Roman Catholics, a bill was passed for their ease and relief, which, however, went with some difficulty through the house of peers. The Dutch in the mean time continued to defend themselves with such valour, that the commons began to despair of success. They therefore resolved that the standing army was a grievance; they next declared, that they would grant no more supplies to carry on the Dutch war, unless it appeared that the enemy were so obstinate as to refuse all reasonable conditions. To cut short these disagreeable alterations, the king resolved to prorogue the parliament; and with that intention, went unexpectedly to the house of peers, from whence he sent the usher of the black-rods to summon the house of commons to attend. It happened that the usher and of the speaker met nearly at the door of the house; but the speaker being within, some of the members suddenly shut the door, and cried, "To the chair." Upon which the following motions were instantly made in a tumultuous manner: That the alliance with France was a grievance; that the evil counsellors of the king were a grievance; and then the house rose in great confusion. The king soon saw that he could expect no supply from the commons for carrying on the war which was so disagreeable to them; he resolved, therefore, to make a separate peace with the Dutch, on terms which they had proposed by the Spanish ambassador. For form's sake, he asked the advice of his parliament; who concurring heartily in his intentions, a peace was concluded accordingly.

The prepossession which Charles had all along shown for France, and his manifest inclination upon all occasions to attach himself to that kingdom, had given great offence to his people. Along with this, other circumstances conspired to raise a general discontent. The toleration of Catholics, so much wished for by the king; the bigotry of the duke of York, the heir apparent to the crown, and his zeal for the propagation of the Catholic religion; excited a consternation not altogether without foundation, as if the Protestant religion was in danger. This fear and discontent was carefully kept up and fomented by wicked and designing men, who to promote their own interests would not scruple to advance the grossest falsehoods. In 1678, an account of a plot formed by the Papists for detroying the king and the Protestant religion, was given in by one Kirby a chemist, Dr Tong, a weak credulous clergyman, and Titus Oates, who had likewise been a clergyman, but one of the most abandoned miscreants that can be imagined. The circumstances attending this pretended discovery were so perfectly incredible, that it appears amazing how any person of common sense could give ear to them. Nevertheless, so much were the minds of the nation in general inflamed against the Catholics at this time, that it not only produced the destruction of individuals of the Romish persuasion, but an universal massacre. massacre of that unhappy sect was apprehended. The parliament, who ought to have repressed these delusions, and brought back the people to calm deliberate inquiry, were found more credulous than even the vulgar themselves. The cry of plot was immediately echoed from one house to the other; the country party could not flip so favourable an opportunity of managing the passions of the people; the courtiers were afraid of being thought disloyal if they should doubt the guilt of those who were accused of designs against the king's person. Danby, the prime minister, himself entered into it very furiously, and persisted in his inquiries notwithstanding all the king's advice to the contrary. Charles himself, who was the person that ought to have been most concerned, was the only one who treated it with contempt. Nothing, however, could stop the popular fury; and for a time the king was obliged to give way to it.

During the time of this general uproar and persecution, the lord treasurer Danby was impeached in the house of commons by Seymour the speaker. The principal charge against him was, his having written a letter to Montague the king's ambassador at Paris, directing him to sell the king's good offices at the treaty of Nimeguen, to the king of France, for a certain sum of money; contrary to the general interests of the confederates, and even of those of his own kingdoms. Though the charge was just, yet Danby had the happiness to find the king resolved to defend him. Charles assured the parliament, that, as he had acted in everything by his orders, he held him entirely blameless; and though he would deprive him of all his employments, yet he would positively insist on his personal safety. The lords were obliged to submit; however, they went on to impeach him, and Danby was sent to the Tower; but no worse consequences followed.

These furious proceedings had been carried on by a house of commons that had continued undissolved for above 17 years. They were now dissolved, and another parliament was called; which, however, proved as unmanageable as the preceding. The members resolved to check the growth of Popery by striking at the root of the evil; and therefore brought in a bill for the total exclusion of the duke of York from the crown of England and Ireland, which passed the lower house by a majority of 79. They next voted the king's standing army and guards to be illegal. They proceeded to establish limits to the king's power of imprisoning delinquents at will. It was now also that the celebrated statute called the habeas corpus act was passed, which confirms the subject in an absolute security from oppressive power.

During these troubles, the duke of York had retired to Brussels; but an indisposition of the king led him back to England, to be ready in case of any further accident, to assert his right to the throne. After prevailing upon his brother to disgrace his natural son the duke of Monmouth, who was now become very popular, he himself retired to Scotland, under pretence of quieting the apprehensions of the English nation, but in reality to strengthen his interests in that part of the empire. This secession served still more to inflame the country party, who were strongly attached to the duke of Monmouth, and were resolved to support him against the duke of York. Mobs, petitions, popish burnings, were artifices employed to keep up the terrors of Popery, and alarm the court. The parliament had shown favour to the various tribes of informers, and that served to increase the number of these miscreants: but plots themselves also became more numerous. Plot was set up against plot; and the people were kept suspended in the most dreadful apprehension.

But it was not by plots alone that the adverse parties endeavoured to supplant each other. Turbulent petitions on the one hand, and flattering addresses on the other, were sent from all quarters. Wherever the country party prevailed, petitions were sent to the king filled with grievances and apprehensions. Wherever the church or court party prevailed, addresses were framed, containing expressions of the highest regard to his majesty, and the deepest abhorrence of those who endeavoured to disturb the public tranquillity. Thus the nation came to be distinguished into petitioners and abhorrents, Whig and Tory, also, were now first used as terms of reproach. The Whigs were so denominated from a cant name given to the four presbyterian conventicles, (whig being milk turned sour). The Tories were denominated from the Irish banditti so called, whose usual manner of bidding people deliver was by the Irish word Toree, or "Give me."

All this time the king had tyrannized over the Scots in a very cruel manner. Being apprized of the tendency of presbyterian principles to a republican form of government, Charles, like his predecessors, had endeavoured to introduce Episcopacy there, but in a much more violent manner than had been formerly attempted. The rights of patrons had for some years been abolished; and the power of electing ministers had been vested in the kirk-sessions and lay elders: but it was now enacted, that all incumbents who had been admitted upon this title should receive a presentation, and be instituted anew by the bishop, under the penalty of deprivation. In consequence of this, 342 parishes were at once declared vacant. New ministers were sought for all over the kingdom, and none so vicious or ignorant as to be rejected. The people, as might have been expected, were displeased to the highest degree; they resolved, however, to give no sign of mutiny or sedition, notwithstanding their discontent. This submission made their case still worse; it being foolishly imagined, that, as they did not complain for a little ill usage, they would submit altogether if they were worse treated.

Affairs remained in a peaceable situation, till, in Presbyterian 1661, a very severe act was passed in England against the presbyterians, and this severity was imitated by the Scots. Military force was next let loose. Wherever the people had generally forsaken their churches, the guards were quartered throughout the country. They were commanded by Sir James Turner, a man of a very furious temper and dissolute life. He went about and received lists from the clergy of those who abstained themselves from the churches, or were supposed to frequent conventicles. Without any proof, or legal conviction, he demanded a fine from them; and quartered soldiers on the supposed criminals till he received payment. An insurrection being dreaded during the Dutch war, new forces were levied, and entrusted to the command of Dalziel and Drummond, two men of very cruel dispositions, sitions, and the Scots parliament gave full scope to all their enormities.

Representations were now made to the king, who promised some redress. But his lenity came too late. The people, in 1668, rose in arms. They surprized Turner in Dumfries, and resolved to have put him to death; but finding his orders to be more violent than his execution of them, they spared his life. At Lanark they renewed the covenant, and published their manifesto; where they professed their submission to the king, and only desired the re-establishment of presbytery, and of their former ministers. Their force never exceeded 2000 men; and though the country in general bore them great favour, men's spirits were so subdued, that the insurgents could expect no farther increase of numbers. Dalziel took the field to oppose them. The number of the covenanters was now reduced to 800, and these no way capable of contending with regular forces. Having advanced near Edinburgh, they attempted to find their way back into the west by Pentland-hills. Here they were attacked by the king's troops, and received the first charge very resolutely; but that was all the action. Immediately they fell into confusion, and fled. About 40 were killed on the spot, and 130 taken prisoners.

So long ago as the year 1661, the presbyterians had deputed one Sharpe to lay their grievances before the king. Instead of this, their deputy abandoned the cause altogether, became their violent enemy, and as a reward of his treachery was made archbishop of St Andrew's. After the battle of Pentland-hills, this man was the foremost to take vengeance on the unhappy insurgents, whose oppressed state and inoffensive behaviour had made them objects of universal compassion. Ten were hanged on one gibbet in Edinburgh; 35 before their own doors in different places. They might all have saved their lives if they would have renounced the covenant; but this they absolutely refused. The executions were going on, when the king wrote a letter to the privy-council, in which he ordered that such of the prisoners as should finally promise to obey the laws for the future should be set at liberty, and that the incorrigible should be sent to the plantations. This letter was brought to the council by Burnet, but was not immediately delivered by Sharpe. What his motives were for this delay, we pretend not to say; but certain it is, that no action of his life will bear a worse construction than this. It had been customary to put these poor creatures to very severe tortures, in order to make them confess that to be falsehood which they believed to be true. By Sharpe's delay, one Hugh Maccaill had been tortured, who would otherwise have escaped; and so violent were the torments he endured, that he expired under them. He seemed to die in an ecstacy of joy. His last words were uttered with an accent which struck all the bystanders with astonishment. "Farewell (said he) fun, moon, and stars; farewell world and time; farewell weak frail body: welcome eternity; welcome angels and saints; welcome Saviour of the world; and welcome God the judge of all."

In 1670, an act against conventicles was passed, seemingly with a design of mitigating the former persecuting laws; though even this was severe enough. By this act, the hearer in a conventicle (that is, in a dissenting assembly where more than five besides the family were present) was fined 5s. for the first offence, and 10s. for the second; the preacher 20l. for the first offence, and 40l. for the second. The person in whose house the conventicle met was fined in a like sum with the preacher. One remarkable clause was, that if any dispute should arise with regard to the interpretation of any part of the act, the judges should always explain the doubt in the sense least favourable to conventicles, it being the intention of parliament entirely to suppress them.

As the violent methods used by the king were found ineffectual to obtain his purpose in Scotland, in 1678 a scheme of comprehension was tried, by which it was proposed to diminish greatly the authority of the bishops, to abolish their negative voice in the ecclesiastical courts, and to leave them little more than the right of precedence among the presbyters: but this too was rejected by the people, who well knew its tendency. The next scheme was an indulgence. By this, the most popular of the expelled preachers, without requiring any terms of submission to the established religion, were settled in vacant churches; and small salaries of about 20l. a-year were offered to the rest, till they should be otherwise established. This bounty was rejected as the wages of criminal silence, and the replaced ministers soon repented of their compliance; conventicles multiplied, and the covenanters daily met in arms at their places of worship, though they usually dispersed themselves after divine service.

These mild methods being rejected, a renewal of the persecution commenced under the administration of the renewed duke of Lauderdale, and in which Archbishop Sharpe had a principal hand. It was an old law, and but seldom put in execution, that a man who was accused of any crime, and did not appear to take his trial, might be intercommuniced; that is, he might be publicly outlawed; and whoever afterwards, either on account of business, relation, or charity, had the least intercourse with him, was subjected to the same penalties which the law could inflict on the criminal himself. A great many writs of intercommuning were now issued against the covenanters; by which absurd method of proceeding, crimes and punishments were multiplied to an extreme degree.

Application was made to Charles for some redress of these grievances; but he was too much taken up with his pleasures to take any effectual means of putting a stop to them; nay, even while he retracted them, he was persuaded to avow and praise them in a letter to the privy-council. The consequence of all this was, Archbishop Sharpe that the covenanters were at last so much enraged against Sharpe, whom they considered as an apostate, murdered, and experienced to be an unrelenting persecutor, that, on the 3d of May 1679, he was way-laid and murdered with all the circumstances of unrelenting cruelty. The murder of Sharpe produced a persecution still more violent, which at last brought on another insurrection.

The covenanters finding themselves obliged to meet in large bodies, and bring arms along with them for their own security, set forth a declaration against prelacy, which they published at Rutherglen, a small borough near Glasgow; and in the market-place there they burned several acts of parliament which had effa- blished that mode of ecclesiastical government, and had prohibited all conventicles. For this purpose they chose the 29th of May, the anniversary of the restoration; and previously extinguished the bonfires that had been kindled on that occasion. Count Graham, afterwards Viscount Dundee, an active and enterprising officer, attacked a great conventicle upon Loudon-hill, but was repulsed with the loss of 30 men. The covenanters then finding themselves unwarily engaged in rebellion, were obliged to persevere; and therefore pushed on to Glasgow, which, though repulsed at first, they afterwards made themselves masters of. Here they dispossessed the established clergy, and issued proclamations, in which they declared that they fought against the king's supremacy, against Popery and Prelacy, and against a Popish successor.

Charles, being now alarmed, dispatched against the covenanters a small body of English cavalry under the duke of Monmouth. He joined the Scots guards, and some regiments of militia levied from the well-afflicted counties; and with great celerity marched in quest of the insurgents. They had taken post at Bothwell-bridge between Hamilton and Glasgow; where there was no access but by the bridge, and where a small body was able to defend it against the king's army. The whole army of the covenanters never exceeded 8000 men, and they had in reality no other generals than their clergymen. Monmouth attacked the bridge, and the covenanters maintained their post as long as their ammunition lasted. When they sent for more, they received orders to quit their post and retire; and this imprudent measure occasioned an immediate defeat. Monmouth passed the bridge without opposition, and drew up his forces opposite to the enemy. His cannon alone put them to the rout. About 700 were killed in the pursuit; for, properly speaking, there was no action. Twelve hundred were taken prisoners, and treated with humanity by Monmouth. Such as promised to live peaceably under the present government were dismissed; and about 300 who refused this condition were shipped for Barbadoes, but unfortunately perished by the way. Two of their clergymen were hanged. Soon after, an act of indemnity was passed; but Lauderdale took care that it should afford little protection to the unhappy covenanters; for though orders were given to connive thenceforward at all conventicles, he found means under a variety of pretences to elude the execution of them.

It is now certainly known, that King Charles II. had formed a scheme of overturning the established religion, and substituting Popery in its place; as also of rendering himself absolute. In this, however, he met with violent opposition from his parliaments; and as this one of 1679 seemed even to surpass its predecessors in violence, the king was induced to dissolve them and call another in 1680. By this step, however, he was no gainer. They voted the legality of petitioning the king; and fell with extreme violence on the abhorers, who in their addresses to the crown had expressed their disapprobation of those petitions. Great numbers of these were seized by their order in all parts of England, and committed to close custody: the liberty of the subject, which had been so carefully guarded by their own recent law, was every day violated by their arbitrary and capricious imprisonments. One Stowel of Exeter put a stop to their proceedings: he refused to obey the sergeant at arms who was sent to apprehend him; he stood upon his defence, and said he knew no law by which the house of commons pretended to commit him. The house, finding it equally dangerous to proceed or recede, got off by an evasion. They voted that Stowel was indisposed: and a month's time was allowed him for his recovery. It is happy for the nation, that should the commons at any time overstep the bounds of their authority, and capriciously order men to be put in prison, there is no power, in case of resistance, that can compel the prisoners to submit to their decrees.

The chief point, however, laboured by the present parliament was, to obtain the seclusion bill, which, though the former house had voted, was never yet passed into a law. It passed by a great majority in the house of commons, but was thrown out by the house of peers. All the bishops except three voted against it; for they were of opinion that the church of England was in much greater danger from the prevalence of Presbyterianism than Popery. The commons were extremely mortified at the rejection of their favourite bill; in revenge they passed several other disagreeable acts, among which one was, That, till the exclusion bill was passed, they could not, consistent with the trust reposed in them, grant the king any manner of supply; and that whoever should hereafter lend, by way of advance, any money upon the branches of the king's revenue, should be responsible to parliament for his conduct. Charles, therefore, finding that there was no hopes either of extorting money or obedience from the commons, came to a resolution of once more dissolving the parliament. His usher of the black rod accordingly came to dissolve them while they were voting that the dissenters should be encouraged, and that the Papists had buried the city of London.

It was for some time a doubt whether the king would ever call another parliament: his necessities, however, furnished all his fears of their violence; and, in 1681, he summoned his parliament to meet him at Oxford, New one that he might thus have an opportunity of punishing called at the city of London by showing his suspicions of their loyalty. In this, as in all former parliaments, the country party predominated; and they trod exactly in the same paths with their predecessors. The same speaker was chosen, and the exclusion bill urged more fiercely than before. Ernely, one of the king's ministers, proposed that the duke should be banished 500 miles from England; and that on the king's decease, the next heir should be constituted regent with regal power. Yet even this expedient, which left the duke the bare title of king, could not obtain the attention of the house. Nothing but a total exclusion could satisfy them.

Each party had now for some time reviled and ridiculed each other in pamphlets and libels; and this practice at last was attended with an incident that deserves notice. One Fitzharris, an Irish Papist, employed a case of Scott named Everhard to write a libel against the king and the duke of York. The Scot was actually a spy for the contrary party; and supposing this a trick to entrap him, he discovered the whole to Sir William Waller, an eminent justice of the peace; and, to convince them of the truth of his information, posted the magistrate and two other persons privately, where they heard. heard the whole conference between Fitzharris and himself. The libel composed between them was replete with the utmost rancour and ferocity. Waller carried the intelligence to the king, and obtained a warrant for committing Fitzharris, who happened at that very time to have a copy of the libel in his pocket. Seeing himself in the hands of a party from whom he expected no mercy, he resolved to side with them, and throw the odium of the libel upon the court, who, he said, were willing to draw up a libel which should be imputed to the exclusioners, and thus render them hateful to the people. He enhanced his services to the country-party by a new Popish plot more tremendous than any of the foregoing, and in which he brought in the duke of York as a principal accomplice.

The king imprisoned Fitzharris; the commons avowed his cause. They voted that he should be impeached by themselves, to screen him from the ordinary forms of justice; the lords rejected the impeachment; the commons asserted their right: a commotion was likely to ensue; and the king, to break off the contest, went to the house and dissolved the parliament, with a fixed resolution never to call another.

From this moment the king ruled with despotic power. His temper, which had always been easy and merciful, now became arbitrary and cruel; he entertained spies and informers round the throne, and imprisoned all such as he thought most daring in their designs. He resolved to humble the Presbyterians: they were divested of their employments and their places; and their offices given to such as held with the court, and approved the doctrine of non-resistance. The clergy began to testify their zeal and their principles by their writings and sermons; but though among these the partizans of the king were the most numerous, those of the opposite faction were the most enterprising. The king openly espoused the cause of the former; and thus placing himself at the head of a faction, he deprived the city of London, which had long headed the popular party, of their charter. It was not till after an abject submission that he restored it to them, having previously subjected the election of their magistrates to his immediate authority.

Terrors also were not wanting to confirm this new species of monarchy. Fitzharris was brought to a trial before a jury, and condemned and executed. The whole gang of spies, witnesses, informers, suborners, which had long been encouraged and supported by the leading patriots, finding now that the king was entirely master, turned short upon their ancient drivers, and offered their evidence against those who first put them in motion. The king's ministers gave them encouragement; and in a short time the same injustice and the same cruelties were practised against Presbyterian schemes that had formerly been practised against Catholic treasons. The king's chief resentment was levelled against the earl of Shaftesbury; and, indeed, not without reason, as he had had a very active hand in the late disturbances. No sums were spared to seek for evidence, or even to suborn witnesses, against this intriguing and formidable man. A bill of indictment being presented to the grand jury, witnesses were examined, who swore to such incredible circumstances as must have invalidated their testimony, even if they had not been branded as perjured villains. Among his papers, indeed, a draught of an association was found, which might have been construed into treason; but it was not in the earl's handwriting, nor could it be proved that he had ever communicated this scheme to any body, or signified his approbation of any such project. The sheriffs had summoned a jury, whose principles coincided with those of the earl; and that probably, more than any want of proof, procured his safety.

In 1683, the city of London was deprived of its charter; which was restored only upon terms of the utmost submission, and giving up the nomination of their own magistrates. This was so mortifying a circumstance, that all the other corporations in England soon began to fear the same treatment, and were successively induced to surrender their charters into the hands of the king. Considerable sums were exacted for restoring these charters; and all the offices of power and profit were left at the disposal of the crown. Resistance now, however justifiable, could not be safe; and all prudent men saw no other expedient but submitting patiently to the present grievances.

There was a party, however, in England, that still cherished their former ideas of freedom, and resolved to restore liberty to their country by dethroning the king, who acted in such a despotic manner. The principal conspirators were Monmouth, Shaftesbury, Russell, Essex, Howard, Algernon Sidney, and John Hampden grandson to the great man of that name. Monmouth engaged the earl of Macclesfield, Lord Brandon, Sir Gilbert Gerard, and other gentlemen in Cheshire. Lord Russell fixed a correspondence with Sir William Courtney, Sir Francis Knowles, and Sir Francis Drake, who promised to raise the west. Shaftesbury, with one Fergulon, an independent clergyman, and a restless plotter, managed the city, upon which the confederates chiefly relied. These schemes had been laid in 1681; but the caution of Lord Russell, who induced the duke of Monmouth to put off the enterprise, saved the kingdom from the horrors of a civil war; while Shaftesbury was so struck with a sense of his impending danger, that he left his house, and lurking about the city, attempted, but in vain, to drive the Londoners to an open insurrection. At last, enraged at the numberless cautions and delays which clogged and defeated his projects, he threatened to begin with his own friends first. However, after a long struggle between fear and rage, he abandoned all hopes of success, and fled to Amsterdam, where he soon after died.

The loss of Shaftesbury, though it retarded, did not suppress the designs of the conspirators. The remaining five formed a council; they corresponded with Argyle and the malecontents in Scotland; and resolved to prosecute the scheme of the insurrection, though they widely differed in principles from one another. Monmouth aspired to the crown; Russell and Hampden proposed to exclude the duke of York from the succession, and redress the grievances of the nation; Sidney was for restoring the republic, and Essex joined in the same wish. Lord Howard was an abandoned man, who, having no principles, sought to embroil the nation, to gratify his private interest in the confusion.

Besides these, there was a set of subordinate conspirators, who frequently met together, and carried on afflicting projects quite unknown to Monmouth and his council. Among these was Colonel Rumsey, an old republican officer; Lieutenant-colonel Walcot, of the same stamp; Goodenough, under-sheriff of London, a zealous and noted party-man; Fergulon, an independent minister; and several attorneys, merchants, and tradesmen of London. But Rumsey and Fergulon were the only persons that had access to the great leaders of the conspiracy. These men undertook the desperate resolution of assassinating the king in his way to Newmarket; Rumbold, one of the party, possessed a farm upon that road, called the Rye-house, and from thence the conspiracy was called the Rye-house plot. They deliberated on a scheme of stopping the king's coach by overturning a cart on the highway at this place, and shooting him through the hedges. The house in which the king lived at Newmarket accidentally took fire, and he was obliged to leave Newmarket eight days sooner than was expected; to which circumstance he owed his safety. Soon after this the conspiracy was discovered; Russell, Sidney, and Walcot, were executed; Essex cut his own throat; Hampden was fined £40,000; and scarce one escaped who had been in any manner concerned, except the duke of Monmouth, who was the most culpable of all.

This was the last blood that was shed on account of plots or conspiracies, which continued during the greatest part of this reign. Severe punishments, however, were inflicted on many who treated the duke of York unworthily. The famous Titus Oates was fined £10,000 for calling him a Popish traitor; and he was imprisoned till he should pay it, which he was absolutely incapable of. A similar sentence was passed upon Dutton Colt. Sir Samuel Barnadiston was fined £10,000 for having in some private letters reflected on the government. The government of Charles was now as absolute as that of any prince in Europe; but to please his subjects by an act of popularity, he judged it proper to marry the lady Anne, his niece, to Prince George brother to the king of Denmark. This was the last remarkable transaction of this extraordinary reign. On February 2, 1685, about eight in the morning, the king was seized with a fit of the apoplexy; being dressed, and just come out of his closet, where he had been for some time after he rose from bed. By being blooded, he was restored perfectly to his senses; and there were great hopes of his recovery the next day. On the fourth day the physicians despaired of his life, and therefore sent for the queen. He was in his perfect senses when she arrived. She threw herself on her knees, and asked his pardon for all her offences. He replied, that she had offended in nothing; but that he had been guilty of offences against her, and asked her pardon. He spoke with great affection to the duke of York, and gave him excellent counsel for his future conduct. He advised him to adhere to the laws with strictness, and invariably to support the church of England. The duke seemed anxious to convince him before he died how little he intended to follow his advice. Having removed the bishops, and several of the lords who attended the bed of the king, he sent for Huddleston a Romanist priest. In the presence of the duke, the earl of Bath, and Trevannion a captain in the guards, Huddleston gave the extreme unction to the king, and administered to him the sacrament according to the rites of the church of Rome.

All this was done in the space of half an hour. The doors were then thrown open. Six prelates, who had before attended the king, were sent to give him the sacrament. Kenn, bishop of Bath and Wells, read the visitation of the sick; and after he said that he repented of his sins, the absolution. The king assisted with seeming devotion at the service; but his mouth being distorted with fits, and his throat contracted, he could not swallow the elements. He professed, however, his satisfaction in the church of England; and expired on the 6th of February between 11 and 12 o'clock: having reigned 25 years, and lived 55.

The first act of James II's reign was to assemble the privy council; where, after some praises bestowed on the memory of his predecessor, he made professions of his resolution to maintain the established government both in church and state; and as he had heretofore ventured his life in defence of the nation, he would still go as far as any man in maintaining all its just rights and privileges.

This discourse was received with great applause, not only by the council, but by the whole nation. Addresses came from all quarters, full of duty, nay, of the most servile adulation. From this charge, however, we must except those of the Quakers, which is remarkable for its good sense and simplicity. "We are come (said Quakers they) to testify our sorrow for the death of our good friend Charles, and our joy for thy being made our governor. We are told that thou art not of the persuasion of the church of England no more than we: wherefore we hope that thou wilt grant us the same liberty which thou allowest thyself. Which doing, we with thee all manner of happiness."

The king, however, soon showed, that he either was imprudent not sincere in his promises, or that he entertained too lofty an idea of his own regal power, that even his utmost sincerity could tend very little to the security of the liberties of the people. All the customs, and the greater part of the excise, which had been voted to the late king for his life only, were levied by James without a new act for that purpose. He went openly to mass with all the ensigns of his dignity; and even sent one Caryl as his agent to Rome to make submissions to the pope, and to pave the way for the readmission of England into the bosom of the Catholic church. From the suggestions of these men all his measures were undertaken. One day when the Spanish ambassador ventured to advise his majesty against putting too much confidence in such kind of people, "Is it not the custom in Spain (said James) for the king to consult with his confessor?" "Yes (answered the ambassador), and that is the reason why our affairs succeed so very ill."

James's first parliament, which was composed mostly of zealous tories, was strongly inclined to comply with the measures of the crown. They voted unanimously, that they should settle on the present king, during life, all the revenue enjoyed by the late king till the time of his decease. For this favour, James assured them, that he would secure them in the full enjoyment of their laws; but with regard to religion, no answer could be extorted, for that he was resolved to alter. In every thing, however, religion excepted, James merited every respect he praisèd. He applied himself to business with unremitting attention. He managed his revenue with the well- Britain. strictest economy. He retrenched superfluous expenses, and showed himself zealous for the glory of the nation. He endeavoured to expel from court the vice which had prevailed so much during the former reign, and to restore decency and morality. He presided daily at the council, at the boards of admiralty and treasury. He even entered into the whole detail of the concerns of the great departments of the state. But his bigotry for the Roman religion nullified all his good qualities, and rendered him feared for his violence, where he was not despised for his weaknesses.

But whilst every thing was submitted in tranquillity to James at home, a storm was gathering abroad to disturb his repose. For a long time the prince of Orange had entertained hopes of ascending the British throne, and had even used all his endeavours to exclude James from it. Monmouth, who, since his last conspiracy, had been pardoned, but ordered to depart the kingdom, had retired to Holland. He was received by the prince of Orange with the highest marks of distinction, and even became his chief favourite, through whom all favours were to be obtained. When the news of Charles's death arrived, indeed, the prince made a show of altering his note, and dismissed Monmouth, though he still kept a close correspondence with him. The duke retired to Brussels, where, under the auspices of the prince of Orange, he resolved to invade England, with a design of seizing the crown for himself. He was seconded by the duke of Argyle, who formed the scheme of an insurrection in Scotland; and while Monmouth attempted to make a rising in the west of England, it was resolved that Argyle should also try his endeavours in the north. The generosity of the prince of Orange, however, did not correspond with the warmth of his professions. The unfortunate duke derived his own plate and jewels his whole supply for the war; and the enthusiasm of a rich widow supplied Argyle with 10,000l., wherewith he purchased three vessels, which he loaded with arms and ammunition.

Argyle was the first who landed in Scotland, where he published his manifesto, put himself at the head of 2,000 men, and strove to influence the people in his favour. But a formidable body of the king's forces coming against him, his army fell away; and he himself, after being wounded in attempting to escape, was taken prisoner by a peasant who found him standing up to the neck in water. He was from thence carried to Edinburgh, where, after suffering many indignities, he was publicly executed.

By this time Monmouth had landed in Dorsetshire with scarcely 100 followers. His name, however, was so popular, and so great was the hatred of the people to James on account of his religion, that in four days he had assembled a body of above 2,000 men. They were indeed all of them the lowest of the people, and his declarations were suited entirely to their prejudices. He called the king the duke of York; and denominated him a traitor, a murderer, and a Popish usurper. He imputed to him the fire of London, and even affirmed that he had poisoned the late king.

Monmouth continued to make a rapid progress, and in a short time found himself at the head of 6,000 men; but was daily obliged to dismiss great numbers for want of arms. The king was not a little alarmed at his invasion. Six regiments of British troops were called over from Holland; and a body of regulars, to the number of 3,000, was sent, under the command of the earl of Feversham and Churchill, to check the progress of the rebels. They took post at Sedgemoor, a village in the neighbourhood of Bridgewater, and were joined by considerable numbers of the country militia. Here Monmouth resolved, by a desperate effort, to lose his life or gain the kingdom. He drove the royal infantry from their ground, and was on the point of gaining a complete victory, when the cowardice of Gray, who commanded the horse, brought all to ruin. This nobleman fled at the first onset; and the rebels, being charged in flank, gave way after a three hours' contest. About 300 were killed in the engagement, and 1,000 in the pursuit. Monmouth fled above 20 miles from the field of battle, till his horse sunk under him. He then alighted; and, exchanging clothes with a shepherd, fled on foot, attended by a German count who had accompanied him from Holland. Being quite exhausted with hunger and fatigue, they both lay down in a field, and covered themselves with fern. The shepherd being found in Monmouth's clothes by the pursuers, increased the diligence of the search; and by the means of blood-hounds he was detected in his miserable situation, with raw peas in his pocket, on which he had lived for some days. He burst into tears when seized by his enemies; and petitioned, with the most abject submissions, for his life. On his way to London, he wrote a submissive letter to the king, promising discovery, should he be admitted into his presence. The attain mercy-courtesy of James being excited by the letter, he sent Sheldon a gentleman of his bed-chamber to meet Monmouth. In his conversation with Sheldon, he asked who was in chief confidence with the king? and being answered that it was Sunderland, Monmouth knocked his breast in a surprize, and said, "Why then, as I hope for salvation, he promised to meet me." He desired Sheldon to inform the king, that several of his accomplices in rebellion were in the confidence of his majesty; and he gave him a particular account of the part which the prince of Orange had acted in this whole affair.

Sheldon, on his return from the duke of Monmouth, began to give an account to the king of what he had learned from the unhappy prisoner. Sunderland, pretending business, came into the room. Sheldon stopped, and signified his desire to speak in private with the king. James told him he might say anything before that lord. Sheldon was in great perplexity; but being urged, he told all that Monmouth had asserted. Sunderland appeared for some time confused: at length he said, with a laugh, "If that is all he can discover to save his life, he will derive little good from his information." Monmouth himself was soon after brought before the king. Sunderland by an artifice ensured the death of the unfortunate duke, to save himself and the other adherents of the prince of Orange. When he saw Monmouth's letter to James, and heard the discoveries made by Sheldon, he is said to have advised him, that, as he could assure him of the certainty of a pardon, he ought to deny what he had said in prejudice of his friends, who could serve him on some other more favourable occasion. The credulous duke, swayed by the advice of Sunderland, suppressed what he had said to Sheldon, when he was examined by the king. He mentioned nothing of the concern which the prince of Orange had taken in the invasion; though a point on which James was already sufficiently informed. D'Avaux, the French minister to the States, had given a circumstantial account of the whole conduct of the prince to Louis XIV, who had ordered it to be privately communicated to the king of England. The minister who had been sent from Holland to congratulate James on the suppression of Argyll's rebellion, was in a grievous agony when he heard that the king was resolved to see Monmouth. "Though he found that he said nothing of his matter (said James), he was never quiet till Monmouth was dead."

The unfortunate duke made various attempts to obtain mercy. He wrote to the queen dowager; he sent a letter to the reigning queen, as well as to the king himself. He begged his life, when admitted into his presence, with a meanness unfitting to his pretensions and high rank. But all his intreatesies and submissions were of no avail. James told him, that he was much affected with his misfortunes, but that his crime was too dangerous in its example to be left unpunished. In his last moments he behaved with a magnanimity worthy of his former courage. When he came to the scaffold, he behaved with decency and even with dignity. He spoke little; he made no confession; nor did he accuse any of his friends. Circumstances are said to have attended his death that created a horror among the spectators. The executioner missed his blow, and struck him lightly on the shoulder. Monmouth raised his head from the block, and looked him full in the face, as if reproaching him for his mistake. He struck him twice again, but with feeble strokes; and then threw the axe from his hands. The sheriff forced him to renew his attempt; and the head of the duke, who seemed already dead, was at last severed from his body.

Those concerned in the duke of Monmouth's conspiracy were punished with the utmost severity. Immediately after the battle of Sedgemoor, Evertham hanged up above 20 prisoners; and was proceeding in his executions, when the bishop of Bath and Wells informed him that these unhappy men were now by law entitled to a trial, and that their execution would be deemed a real murder. Nineteen were put to death in the same manner at Bridgewater by Colonel Kirke, a man of a savage and bloody disposition. This vile fellow, practised in the arts of slaughter at Tangiers, where he served in garrison, took pleasure in committing instances of wanton barbarity. He ravaged the whole country, without making any distinction between friend and foe. His own regiment, for their peculiar barbarity, went under the ironical title of Kirke's lambs. It doth not, however, appear, that these cruelties were committed by the direction, or even with the approbation, of James; any more than the legal slaughters that were committed by Judge Jefferies, who was sent down to try the delinquents. The natural brutality of this man's temper was inflamed by continual intoxication. No fewer than 80 were executed by his orders at Dorchester; and on the whole, at Exeter, Taunton, and Wells, 250 are computed to have fallen by the hand of justice as it was called; nor were women exempted from the general severity, but suffered for harbouring their nearest kindred. Jefferies on his return was immediately created a peer, and soon after vested with the dignity of chancellor. In justice to the king, however, it must be owned, that in his Memoirs he complains, with apparent indignation, of "the strange havoc made by Jefferies and Kirke in the west;" and that he attributed the unpopularity, which afterwards deprived him of the crown, to the violence and barbarity of those pretended friends of his authority. He even ascribes their severities, in some degree, to a formed design of rendering his government odious to his subjects; and from thence it is probable, that no exact or impartial accounts of these cruelties had reached his ears, at least till long after they were committed.

James now began to throw off the mask, and to endeavour openly to establish Popery and arbitrary power. He told the house of commons, that the militia were found by experience to be of no use; that it was necessary to augment the standing army; and that he had employed a great many Catholic officers, in whose favour he had thought proper to dispense with the test required to be taken by all who were employed by the crown. He found them useful, he said, and he was determined to keep them employed. These stretches of power naturally led the lords and commons into some degree of opposition; but they soon acquiesced in the king's measures, and then the parliament was dissolved for their tardy compliance. This was happy for the nation; for it was perhaps impossible to pick out another house of commons that could be more ready to acquiesce in the measures of the crown; but the dissolution of this parliament was generally looked upon as a sign that James never intended to call another.

The parliament being dismissed, James's next step was to secure a Catholic interest in the privy council. Accordingly four Catholic lords were admitted, viz. Powis, Arundel, Belafus, and Dover. Sunderland, who saw that the only way to gain preferment was by Popery, became a convert. Rochester, the treasurer, was turned out of his office, because he refused to conform. Even in Ireland, where the duke of Ormond had long supported the royal cause, this nobleman was displaced as being a Protestant; and the lord Tyrconnel, a furious Roman Catholic, was placed in his stead. In his zeal for Popery, it is said, that James stooped so low as even to attempt the conversion of Colonel Kirke; but the daring folder told him, that he was pre-engaged; for he had promised the king of Morocco, when he was quartered at Tangiers, that, if ever he changed his religion, he would turn Mahometan.

At last the clergy of the church of England began to take the alarm, and commenced an opposition to court measures. The pulpits now thundered out against Popery; and it was urged, that it was more formidable foes from the support granted it by the king. It was in vain that James attempted to impose silence on these topics; instead of avoiding the controversy, the Protestant preachers pursued it with greater warmth.

To effect his designs, the king determined to revive the high commission court, which had formerly given the nation so much disgust, and which had been abolished for ever by act of parliament. An ecclesiastical commission was issued out anew, by which seven commissioners missioners were invested with a full and unlimited authority over the whole church of England.—The next step was to allow a liberty of conscience to all sectaries; and he was taught to believe, that the truth of the Catholic religion would then, upon a fair trial, gain the victory. In such a case, the same power that granted liberty of conscience might restrain it; and the Catholic religion alone be allowed to predominate. He therefore issued a declaration of general indulgence, and asserted that nonconformity to the established religion was no longer penal. In Scotland, he ordered his parliament to grant a toleration only to the Catholics, without interceding in the least for the other dissenters who are much more numerous. In Ireland, the Protestants were totally expelled from all offices of trust and profit, and Catholics put in their places. These measures sufficiently disgusted every part of the British empire; but to complete the work, James publicly sent the earl of Castlemaine ambassador extraordinary to Rome, in order to express his obedience to the pope, and reconcile his kingdoms to the Catholic communion. This proceeding was too precipitate to be relished even by the pope himself; and therefore the only return he made to this embassy was the sending a nuncio into England. The nuncio made a public and solemn entry into Windsor; which did not fail to add to the general discontent; and because the duke of Somerset refused to attend the ceremony, he was dismissed from his employment of one of the lords of the bedchamber.

Soon after this, the Jesuits were permitted to erect colleges in different parts of the kingdom, and to exercise the Catholic worship in the most public manner. Father Francis, a Benedictine monk, was recommended by the king to the university of Cambridge for the degree of master of arts. The university rejected him on account of his religion; and presented a petition to the king, befeeching him to recall his mandate. James disregarded their petition, and denied their deputies a hearing; the vice-chancellor himself was summoned to appear before the high commission court, and deprived of his office; yet the university persisted, and Father Francis was refused. The place of president of Magdalen college being vacant, the king sent a mandate in favour of one Farmer, a new convert, and a man of bad character in other respects. The fellows of the college made very submissive applications for recalling this mandate; but the election day coming on before they received an answer, they chose Dr. Hough, a man of learning, integrity, and resolution. The king was incensed at their presumption; an inferior ecclesiastical court was sent down, who finding Farmer a man of scandalous character, issued a mandate for a new election. The man now recommended by the king was Doctor Parker; a man of an abandoned character, but very willing to embrace the Catholic religion. The fellows refused to comply with this injunction; which so irritated the king, that he came down to Oxford in person, and ordered the fellows to be brought before him. He reproached them with their insolence and disobedience; and commanded them to choose Parker without delay. Another refusal on their side served still more to exasperate him; and finding them resolute in the defence of their privileges, he ejected them all except two from their benefices, and Parker was put in possession of the place. Upon this the college was filled with Catholics; and Charnock, one of the two that remained, was made vice-president.

In 1686, a second declaration for liberty of conscience was published almost in the same terms with the former; but with this peculiar injunction, that all divines should read it after service in their churches; the clergy resolved to disobey this order. Loyde bishop of St Asaph, Kenn of Bath and Wells, Turner of Ely, Lake of Chichester, White of Peterborough, and Trelawney of Bristol, together with Sancroft the primate, concerted an address in form of a petition to the king, which, with the warmest expressions of zeal and submission, remonstrated that they could not read his declaration consistently with their consciences or the respect they owed the Protestant religion. The king received their petition with marks of surprize and displeasure. He said he did not expect such an address from the church of England, particularly from some amongst them; and persisted in his orders for their obeying his mandate.

As the petition was delivered in private, the king summoned the bishops before the council, and there questioned them whether they would acknowledge it. They for some time declined giving an answer; but being urged by the chancellor, they at last owned the petition. On their refusal to give bail, an order was immediately drawn for their commitment to the Tower, prisoned, and the crown lawyers received directions to prosecute them for a seditious libel. The king gave orders that the whole city should be conveyed to the Tower by water, as the city in commotion in their favour. The people were no sooner informed of their danger, than they ran to the river-side, in prodigious multitudes, craving their blessing; calling upon Heaven to protect them, &c. The very soldiers by whom they were guarded, kneeled down before them, and implored their forgiveness.

The 29th of June 1686 was fixed for the trial of the bishops; and their return was still more splendidly attended than their imprisonment. Twenty-nine peers, a great number of gentlemen, and an immense crowd of people, waited upon them to Westminster-hall. The dispute was learnedly managed by the lawyers on both sides. The jury withdrew into a chamber where they passed the whole night; but next morning they returned to court, and pronounced the bishops not guilty, acquitted.

Westminster-hall instantly rang with loud acclamations, which were communicated to the whole extent of the city. They even reached the camp at Hornslo, where the king was at dinner in Lord Everingham's tent. His majesty demanding the cause of those rejoicings, and being informed that it was nothing but the soldiers shouting for the delivery of the bishops; "Call you that nothing?" (cried he); but so much the worse for them." Immediately after this, the king struck out two of the judges, Powel and Holloway, who had appeared to favour the bishops. He issued orders to prosecute all those clergymen who had not read his declaration, and all had refused it except 200. He sent also a mandate to the new fellows whom he had obtruded on Magdalen college, to elect for president, in the room of Parker lately deceased, one Gifford, a doctor of the Sorbonne, and titular bishop of Madura.

As the king found the clergymen everywhere averse to his measures, he was willing next to try what he could do with the army. He thought if one regiment should promise implicit obedience, their example would soon induce others to comply. He therefore ordered one of the regiments to be drawn up in his presence, and desired that such as were against his late declaration of liberty of conscience should lay down their arms. He was surprised to see the whole battalion ground their arms, except two officers and a few Roman Catholic soldiers.—A fortunate circumstance happened about this time in his family. A few days before the acquittal of the bishops, the queen was brought to bed of a son, who was baptized by the name of James. This would, if anything could at that time, have served to establish him on the throne; but so great was the animosity against him, that a story was propagated that the child was supposititious; and so great was the monarch’s pride, that he scorned to take any precautions to refute the calumny.

Though the enthusiasm of James himself bordered upon madness, the most wild of his religious projects seem to have been suggested by his enemies to accomplish his ruin. The earl of Sunderland, whom he chiefly trusted, was a man of abandoned principles, insatiable avarice, and fitted by nature for stratagem, deception, and intrigue. The love of money was his ruling passion, and he sold his influence to the highest bidder. To such a degree was he mercenary, that he became at once the pensioner of the prince of Orange and of the king of France. The former, who had long fixed his eye on the English throne, watched James’s motions, and took every advantage of his errors. He had laid his schemes so extensively, that nothing but the birth of a male heir to the crown of England could possibly prevent him from an almost immediate possession of the kingdom. He had the address to render two-thirds of the powers of Europe interested in his success. The treaty of Augsburg, formed to break the power of France, could not accomplish its object without the accession of England. The house of Austria, in both its branches, preferred their political views to their zeal for the Roman faith, and promoted the dethronement of James as the only means to humble Louis XIV. Odescalchi, who under the name of Innocent XI. then filled the papal chair, was gained to the measures of the prince of Orange by other considerations, as well as through his fixed aversion to France. The prince of Orange sent his intimate friend the prince of Vaudemont to Rome, to procure the aid of the pope. He explained to his Holiness, that the Catholic princes were in the wrong to expect any advantage to their faith from James, as his being a declared Papist rendered his people adverse to all his measures. As for himself, should he have the good fortune to mount the throne of England, he might take any step in favour of the Roman Catholics without jealousy; and he promised to procure a toleration for the Papists, should the pope, the emperor, and the king of Spain, favour his attempt. This negotiation procured the desired effect. Innocent contributed, with the money of the church, to expel a Roman Catholic prince from his throne.

Though the contest with the bishops had completed the king’s unpopularity, he derived the suddenness of his ruin from the birth of a prince of Wales. That circumstance increased the fears of his subjects in proportion as it raised his security and hopes. In the reign of a prince to be educated under the prejudices of such a father, nothing but a continuance of the same unconstitutional measures could be expected. So low indeed was his credit sunk among his people at this time, and such prejudice they all seemed to have of his fate, that the child had like to have died before a wet nurse could be procured to suckle him.

The prince of Orange, seeing the national discontent now raised to the highest pitch, resolved to take advantage of it. He began by giving one Dykevelt, his subjects’ envoy, instructions to apply in his name to every religious sect in the kingdom. To the church-party he sent assurances of favour and regard; and protested, that his education in Holland had no way prejudiced him against Episcopacy. To the nonconformists he sent exhortations, not to be deceived by the insidious cares of their known enemy, but to wait for a real and sincere protector, &c. In consequence of these insinuations, the prince soon received invitations from the most considerable persons in the kingdom. Admirals Herbert into bert and Ruffell assured him in person of their own and England’s national attachment. Henry Sidney, brother to Algernon, and uncle to the earl of Sunderland, came over to him with assurances of an universal combination against the king. Lord Dumblaine, son to the earl of Danby, being master of a frigate, made several voyages to Holland, and carried from many of the nobility tenders of duty and even considerable sums of money to the prince of Orange. Soon after, the bishop of London, the earls of Danby, Nottingham, Devonshire, Dorset, and several other lords, gentlemen, and principal citizens, united in their addresses to him, and treated his speedy descent. The people, though long divided between Whig and Tory, now joined against their unhappy sovereign as a common enemy. William therefore determined to accept of their invitations; and this the more readily, as he perceived the malecontents had conducted themselves with prudence and secrecy. Having the principal servants of James in pay, he was minutely informed of the most secret actions and even designs of that prince. His intelligence came through Sidney from Sunderland, who betrayed the very measures which he himself had advised. The prince had a fleet ready to fail, and troops provided for action, before the beginning of June 1688.

The king of France was the first who gave James warning of his danger, and offered to assist him in repelling it. But he declined the friendly offer, lest his danger should be said that he had entered into a private treaty with Louis with that monarch to the prejudice of the Protestant religion. Being also deceived and betrayed by Sunderland, he had the weakness to believe, that the reports of an invasion were invented in order to frighten him into a strict connection with France. He gave credit to the repeated assurances of the States, that the armament prepared in their ports was not designed against England. Nay, he even believed the assertions of the prince himself, whose interest it was to deceive. Sunderland deprecated against the possibility of an invasion, and turned to ridicule all who believed the report. Having by the prior consent of James taken possession of all the foreign correspondence, he suppressed every intelligence. intelligence that might alarm; and even all others whom James trusted, except Dartmouth, affected long to give no faith to the reports of an invasion.

Louis finding his first offers rejected, next proposed to march down his army to the frontiers of the Dutch provinces, and thus detain their forces at home for their own defence. But this proposal met with no better reception than the former. Still Louis was unwilling to abandon a friend and ally whose interest he regarded as closely connected with his own. He ventured to remonstrate with the Dutch against the preparations they were making to invade England. The Dutch treated his remonstrances as an officious impertinence, and James himself declined his mediation.

The king of England, having thus rejected the assistance of his friends, and being left to face the danger alone, was astonished with an advice from his minister in Holland, that an invasion was not only projected but avowed. When he first read the letter containing this information, he grew pale, and the letter dropped from his hand. He saw himself on the brink of destruction, and knew not to whom to apply for protection. In this emergency, Louis wrote to James in his own hand, that to divert the Dutch from their intended invasion of England, he would lay siege to Maastricht with 30,000 men. James communicated this intelligence to Sunderland, and he to the prince of Orange. Six thousand men were thrown into Maastricht; and the design of Louis, as being impracticable, was laid aside. On this Louis being disgusted with James, turned his arms towards Germany. The dauphin laid siege to Philippsburg, on the 5th of October; and Prince Clement of Bavaria, by throwing a strong garrison into Cologne, effectually secured the states of Holland from any sudden danger from the arms of France.

James had now no resource but in retreating from those precipitate measures which had plunged him into inextricable distresses. He paid court to the Dutch, and offered to enter into any alliance with them for their common security. He replaced in all the counties of England all the deputy lieutenants and justices who had been deprived of their commissions for their adherence to the test and penal law. He restored the charters of such corporations as he had possessed himself of; he annulled the high commission court; he reinstated the expelled president and fellows of Magdalen college; and was even reduced to care for those bishops whom he had so lately persecuted and insulted.

All these concessions, however, were now too late; they were regarded as the effects of fear and not of repentance. Indeed, it is said, he very soon gave proofs of his sincerity: for hearing that the Dutch fleet was dispersed, he recalled those concessions he had made in favour of Magdalen college; and to show his attachment to the Roman church, at the baptism of the prince of Wales, he appointed the pope one of the sponsors.

In the meantime, William set sail from Helvoetfluyt with a fleet of near 500 vessels, and an army of above 14,000 men. Fortune, however, seemed at first every way unfavourable to his enterprise. He was driven back by a dreadful storm; but he soon refitted his fleet, and again set sail for England. It was given out that this invasion was designed for the coasts of France; and many of the English, who saw the fleet pass along their coasts, little suspected the place of its destination. It happened that the same wind which sent the Dutch to their place of destination, detained the English fleet in the river; so that the Dutch passed the straits of Dover without molestation; and after a voyage of two days, landed at Broxholme in Torbay, on the 5th of November, the anniversary of the gunpowder treason.

But though the invitation from the English was very general, the prince for some time had the mortification to find himself joined by very few. He continued for ten days in expectation of being joined by the malecontents, and at last was going to despair of success. But just when he began to deliberate about reembarking his forces, he was joined by several persons of consequence, and the whole country soon after flocked to his standard. The first person that joined the prince was Major Burlington, and he was quickly followed by the gentry of the counties of Devon and Somerset. Sir Edward Seymour made proposals for an association, which was signed by great numbers; and every day there appeared some effect of that universal combination into which the nation had entered against the measures of the king.

This was followed by the defection of the army. Lord Colchester, son to the earl of Rivers, first de. of King James's army, Lord Cornbury, son to the earl of Clarendon, carried off the greatest part of three regiments of cavalry at once; and several officers of distinction informed Feversham their general, that they could not in honour fight against the prince of Orange. Soon after this the unhappy monarch found himself deserted by his own servants and creatures. Lord Churchill had been raised from the rank of a page, and had been invested with a high command in the army; he had been created a peer, and owed his whole fortune to the king's bounty: yet even he deserted among the rest; and carried with him the duke of Grafton natural son to the late king, Colonel Berkeley, and others.

In this universal defection, James, not knowing where to turn, began to think of requesting assistance from France when it was now too late. He wrote to Leopold emperor of Germany: but in vain; that monarch only returning for answer, That what he had foreseen had happened. James had some dependence on his fleet; but they were entirely disaffected. In a word, his interests were deserted by all, for he had long deserted them himself. He still found his army, however, to amount to 20,000 men; and had he led them immediately to battle, it is possible they might then have fought in his favour. But James's misfortunes had deprived him of his natural firmness and resolution; and seeing himself deserted by those in whom he thought he could have placed most confidence, he became suspicious of all, and was in a manner deprived even of the power of deliberation. In this extremity of distress, the prince of Denmark, and Anne, James's favourite daughter, perceiving the desperation of his circumstances, cruelly resolved to take part with the prince of Orange. When the king was informed of this, he was stung with the most bitter anguish. "God help me (cried he), my own children have forsaken me." To add to his distress as a parent, he was accused... accused of being accessory to the death of his own child. Her nurse, and her uncle the earl of Clarendon, went up and down like distracted persons, affirming that the Papists had murdered the princesses. They publicly asked the queen's servants, whither they had conveyed her? and they contributed to inflame the populace, whose zeal had already inflamed them to tumult and disorder. It was, however, soon known that she fled, under the conduct of the bishop of London, to Northampton.

On the 30th of November 1688, James sent three of his noblemen to treat with the prince of Orange. But though the latter knew very well that the king's commissioners were in his interests, his behaviour showed plainly that he now thought the time of treating was past. For some time he would not admit them to an audience; and when he did, would give no satisfactory answer. James now began to be afraid of his personal safety. But what most affected him was the terrors of the queen for herself and her infant son. He therefore resolved to send them abroad. They crossed the river in a boat, at Whitehall, in a stormy and rainy day. They were carried to Gravesend in a coach, under the conduct of the Count de Lauzun. A yacht, commanded by Captain Gray, which lay there ready for the purpose, soon transported them in safety to Calais.

The king was now so dispirited and distracted, that he resolved to leave the kingdom at once, and thus throw everything into confusion. He threw the great seal into the Thames; he left none with any authority to conduct affairs in his absence; and he vainly hoped to derive advantage to his affairs from anarchy and disorder. About twelve at night, on the 10th of December, he disguised himself, took a boat at Whitehall, and crossed the river. Sir Edward Hales, with another friend, met him at Vauxhall with horses. He mounted; and being conducted through by-ways by a guide, he passed in the night-time to the Medway, which he crossed by Aylesford bridge. At Woolpeck he took fresh horses, sent thither before by Shelden one of his equerries who was in the secret of his flight. He arrived at 10 o'clock at Embyferry near Faversham, where a customhouse hoy, hired by Sir Edward Hales, lay ready to receive them on board. But the wind blew fresh, and the vessel had no ballast. The master, therefore, easily persuaded the king to permit him to take in ballast at Shilness. It being half ebb when they ran ashore, they despaired to fail as soon as the vessel should be afloat. But when the vessel was almost afloat, she was boarded by three fisher boats belonging to Faversham, containing 50 men. They seized the king and his two companions, under pretence of their being Papists that wanted to escape from the kingdom. They turned up Faversham water with the tide; but still the king remained unknown. Sir Edward Hales placed privately 50 guineas in the hands of the captain, as an earnest of more should he permit them to escape. He promised; but was so far from keeping his word, that he took what money they had, under pretence of securing it from the seamen; and having possessed himself of their all, he left them to their fate. The unfortunate fugitives were at length carried in a coach to Faversham, and the insults, clamours, and shouts of the sailors. When the king was brought to the inn, a seaman who had served under him knew him, and melted into tears; and James himself was so much moved at this instance of his affection, that he wept. The other fishermen who had treated him with such indignity before, when they saw his tears, fell upon their knees. The lower inhabitants of the whole village gathered round him; but the better sort fled from his presence. The seamen, however, formed themselves into a guard round him, and declared, that "a hair of his head should not be touched." In the mean time, Sir James Oxenden, under the pretence of guarding him from the rabble, came with the militia to prevent his escape. The king found his great change in his condition when he was taken out of the hands of the sailors. The commanders of the militia showed him no respect. He was even insulted by the common soldiery. A letter which he intended to send to London for clothes, a change of linen, and some money, was stopped by those who pretended to protect his person.

All things in the mean time ran into confusion at London, and the prince of Orange exercised in his own person all the functions of royalty. He issued a declaration to the disbanded army to reassemble themselves. He ordered the secretary at war to bring him a list of the king's troops. He commanded the lord Churchill to collect his troop of horse guards. He sent the duke of Grafton to take possession in his name of Tilbury fort. The assembly of peers adjourned to the council-chamber at Whitehall, and, to give the appearance of legality to their meeting, chose the marquis of Halifax for their president. While this assembly was sitting, on the 13th of December, a poor countryman, who had been engaged by James, brought an open letter from that unfortunate prince to London. It had no subscription; and it was addressed to none. It contained, in one sentence only, his deplorable condition when in the hands of a desperate rabble. This poor messenger of their fallen sovereign had long waited at the council door, without being able to attract the notice of any who passed. The earl of Mulgrave at length, apprized of his business, had the courage to introduce him to the council. He delivered his open letter, and told the state of the king with tears. The assembly were so much moved, that they sent the earl of Faversham with 200 of the guards towards Faversham. His instructions were to remove him first from danger, and afterwards to attend him to the sea coast, should he choose to retire. He chose, however, to return to London; but the prince of Orange sent a messager to him, desiring him to advance no nearer the capital than Rochester. The messenger missed James by London the way. The king sent Faversham with a letter to the prince of Orange, requesting his presence in London to settle the nation. He himself proceeded to that place, and arrived on the 16th of December. Doubting the fidelity of his troops who were quartered at Westminster, he chose to pass through the city to Whitehall. Never prince returning with victory to his capital was received with louder acclamations of joy. All the streets were covered with bonfires. The bells were rung, and the air was rent with repeated shouts of gladness. All orders of men crowded to his coach; coach; and when he arrived at Whitehall, his apartments were crowded with people who came to express their joy at his return.

The prince of Orange received the news of his return with a haughty air. His aim from the beginning was to force him by threats and severities to relinquish the throne. The Dutch guards were ordered to take possession of Whitehall, and to displace the English. The king was soon after commanded by a message, which he received in bed at midnight, to leave his palace next morning, and to depart for Han, a seat of the duchess of Lauderdale's. He defied however, permission to retire to Rochester, a town not far from the sea coast, and opposite to France. This was readily granted: and it was now perceived that the harsh measures of the prince had taken effect, and that the king meditated an escape to France.

The king, surrounded by the Dutch guards, arrived at Rochester on the 19th of December. The restraint put upon his person, and the manner in which he had been forced from London, raised the indignation of many, and the compassion of all. The English army, both officers and soldiers, began to murmur; and had it not been for the timidity and precipitation of James himself, the nation had certainly returned to their allegiance. He remained three nights at Rochester, in the midst of a few faithful friends. The earls of Arran, Dumbarton, Allesbury, Litchfield, and Middleton, were there; and with other officers of merit, the gallant Lord Dundee. They argued against his flight with united efforts. Several bishops, some peers, and many officers, entreated his stay in some part of England. Message followed message from London. They represented that the opinions of men began to change, and that events would daily rise in favour of his authority. Dundee added his native ardour to his advice. "The question, Sir," said he, "is Whether you shall stay in England, or fly to France? Whether you shall trust the returning zeal of your native subjects, or rely on a foreign power? Here you ought to stand. Keep possession of a part, and the whole will submit by degrees. Refuse the spirit of a king. Summon your subjects to their allegiance. Your army, though disbanded, is not dispersed. Give me your commission. I will gather 10,000 of your troops. I will carry your standard at their head through England, and drive before you the Dutch and their prince."

The king replied, "that he believed it might be done; but that it would raise a civil war, and he would not do so much mischief to a nation that would soon come to their senses again." Middleton urged his stay, though in the remotest part of the kingdom. "Your majesty (said he) may throw things into confusion by your departure; but it will be but the anarchy of a month: but refuses a new government will soon be settled, and you and your family will be ruined." These spirited remonstrances had no effect upon James. He resolved to quit the kingdom; and having communicated his design to a few of his friends, he passed at midnight through the back-door of the house where he lodged, and with his son the duke of Berwick, and Biddulph one of his servants, went in a boat to a smack which lay waiting for him without the fort at Sheerness. By reason of a hard gale they were forced to bear up toward Leigh, and to anchor on the Essex side, under the lee of the land. When the gale slackened, they reached the Buoy of the Narrows without tacking; but not being able to weather the Goodwin, they were forced to fail through the Downs. Seven ships lay there at anchor; but the smack paffed unquestioned along. Unable to fetch Calais, she bore away for Boulogne, and anchored before Ambleteuse. The king landed at three o'clock in the morning of Tuesday, December 25th; France, and taking post, soon joined his queen at St Germain.

James having thus abandoned his dominions, the prince of Orange remained master of them of course. By the advice of the house of lords, the only member of the legislature remaining, he was desired to summon a parliament by circular letters; but the prince, unwilling to act upon so imperfect an authority, convened all the members who had sat in the house of commons during any parliament of Charles II. and to these were added the mayor, aldermen, and fifty of the common council of London; and the prince, being thus supported by an assembly deriving its authority from himself, wrote circular letters to the counties and corporations of England to call a new parliament.

The house being met, which was mostly composed of the Whig party, thanks were given to the prince of Orange for the deliverance he had brought them; after which they proceeded to settle the kingdom. A vote soon passed both houses, that King James II., having endeavoured to subvert the constitution of the kingdom, by breaking the original contract between the king and his people, and having by the advice of Jesuits and other wicked persons, violated the fundamental laws, and withdrawn himself out of the kingdom, had abdicated the government; and that the throne was thereby vacant.

The king being thus deposed, it was easy for William to get himself appointed his successor. Proposals were made for electing a regent. Others were for investiture the princesses of Orange with legal power, and declaring the young prince supposititious. To these proposals, however, William opposed the following decisive argument, viz. that "he had been called over to defend the liberties of the British nation, and that he had happily effected his purpose; that he had heard of several schemes proposed for the establishing of the government; that, if they chose a regent, he thought it incumbent upon him to inform them that he would not be that regent; that he would not accept of the crown under the princess his wife, though he was convinced of her merits; that therefore, if either of these schemes was adopted, he could give them no assistance in the settlement of the nation; but would return home to his own country, satisfied with his aims to secure the freedom of theirs." Upon this, after a long debate in both houses, a new sovereign was preferred to a regent by a majority of two voices. It was agreed that the prince and princess of Orange should reign jointly as king and queen of England; while the administration of government should be placed in the hands of the prince only. The marquis of Halifax, as speaker of the house of lords, made a solemn tender of the crown to their highnesses, in the name of the peers and commons of England. The prince accepted the offer; and that very day, February 13, 1689, William and Mary were proclaimed king and queen of England. Though Mary was comprehended in the royal title, she never possessed either the authority of a queen, or the influence of a wife. Her easy temper had long been subdued by the stern severity of a husband who had very few amiable qualities. Being brought up in a manner under the tuition of her spouse, and in some degree confined by his orders, she was accustomed to adopt implicitly his political maxims and even his thoughts; and in consequence of her want of importance with him, she ceased to be an object of consequence in the eyes of the nation.

William began his reign with issuing a proclamation for continuing in office all Protestants that had been in place on the first of the preceding December. On the 17th of the month he formed his privy council, which consisted chiefly of such persons as had been most active in raising him to the throne. To gratify as many as possible of his friends, the several boards, and even the chancery, were put into commission. The benches of the exchequer and common law were filled with persons who had distinguished themselves against the measures of the late king. The earl of Nottingham who had violently opposed the elevation of William, and the earl of Shrewsbury who had adhered to his views, were made secretaries of state. The marquis of Halifax, and the earl of Danby, though rivals in policy, were admitted into the cabinet; the first as lord privy seal, the second as president of the council. His Dutch friends in the mean time were not forgotten by the king. Bentinck, his favourite, was made a privy counsellor, groom of the stole, and privy purse. Auverquerque was appointed master of the horse. Zuylstein received the office of master of the robes. Schomberg was placed at the head of the ordnance.

Though these instances of gratitude were no doubt necessary to William, the generality of the nation were displeased. The Tories were offended at being excluded from his favour, especially as they had departed from their principles in order to serve him. The nation in general were much prejudiced against foreigners, and universal discontent ensued upon seeing them preferred. The king, who had been bred a Calvinist, was also very strongly inclined to favour that sect; and his prejudices in favour of Calvinism were almost equal to those of James in favour of Popery. Finding, therefore, the clergy of the church of England little inclined to take the oaths to the new government, he began openly to indulge his own prejudices in favour of dissenters. Having come to the house of lords, to pass some bills, on the 16th of March, he made a speech, urging the necessity of admitting all Protestants indiscriminately into the public service. He told his parliament, that he had something to communicate, which would conduce as much to their settlement as to the disappointment of their enemies. He informed them, that he was employed in filling up the vacancies in offices of trust; and he hoped that they were sensible of the necessity of a law to settle the oaths to be taken by such persons as should be admitted into place. As he doubted not, he said, that they would sufficiently provide against Papists, so he hoped that they would leave room for the admission of all Protestants that were able and willing to serve.

This proposition was rejected with vehemence. The adherents of the church complained that the ruin which they feared from the Papists in the preceding reign was now to be dreaded from the Protestant dissenters. They affirmed, that if the established religion was to be destroyed, it mattered little by whose hands it must fall. A bill brought in by the ministry for abrogating the former oaths of supremacy and allegiance was rejected.

An attempt to dispense with the sacramental test was made without success in another form. The court-party proposed that any man should be sufficiently qualified for any office by producing a certificate of his having received the sacrament in any Protestant congregation. But this motion was also rejected in the house of lords by a great majority. William repeated his attempts of a comprehension; but he was ultimately unsuccessful, and in the coronation-oath the church-party inserted a clause highly favourable to themselves, viz., that the king should maintain the Protestant religion "as established by law." To this clause William is said to have discovered an apparent unwillingness to swear.

For these and other reasons, the government of William was for some time but in a very tottering condition. The king, either through want of health or inclination, interfered but little in the affairs of the nation. Ireland was strangely neglected. Halifax and Danby, who had in a manner raised the king to the throne, caballed with his enemies. They perceived that the people, with the same levity that induced them to desert their former sovereign, were beginning to be discontented with their new prince. Everything seemed to tend to a change. Halifax himself declared, that were James to conform with the Protestants, he could not be kept four months from reascending his throne. Danby averred, that were the late king to give satisfaction for the security of religion, it would be difficult to oppose his restoration. From these apparent discontents of the nation, the friends and emissaries of James assumed more boldness. They tampered with the servants of the crown, and inflamed the army. The former they alarmed with the prospect of a sudden change; the latter they roused into indignation by the manifest preference given by William to his countrymen the Dutch.

Though the kingdom of Scotland did not at first recognize the authority of William, yet the party of know-James never attained sufficient strength to be of any effectual service to him in that kingdom. Thirty Scots peers, and near 80 gentlemen, then in London, had waited in the beginning of January on the prince of Orange. Without any authority from the regency still subsisting in Edinburgh, they formed themselves into a kind of convention. The prince of Orange in a formal manner asked their advice. He withdrew, and they adjourned to the council-chamber at Whitehall. The duke of Hamilton being chosen president, explained the distracted state of Scotland. He represented, that disorders, anarchy, and confusion, prevailed; and he urged the necessity of placing the power somewhere till a convention of states should be called to form a lasting and solid settlement. When the heads of their address to the prince of Orange were fettered, and ordered to be engrossed, the earl of Arran unexpectedly arose, and proposed to invite back the king. The meeting, ing, however, adhered to the prince of Orange; and waited on him in a body, requesting him to take the administration into his hands. He thanked them for the trust they had reposed in him; and a convention was ordered to meet at Edinburgh on the 14th of March, and it was provided that no exception or limitation whatever should be made, except that the members should be Protestants.

A secession, however, was made from this convention, in favour of James. The archbishop of Glasgow, the earl of Balcarres, and the viscount Dundee, were authorised by an instrument signed by the late king, at that time in Ireland, to call a convention of the estates at Stirling. But this measure was disappointed, first by the wavering disposition of the marquis of Athol, and afterwards by the delay and folly of the party. At last, the viscount Dundee, being alarmed by an information of a design formed by the covenanters to assassinate him, left Edinburgh at the head of 50 horse. When he passed under the walls of the castle, the duke of Gordon, who held that place, and favoured the cause of James, called him to a conference. He scrambled up the precipice, and informed the duke of his designs in favour of the late king. He conjured him to hold out the castle, under a certainty of being relieved. The novelty of the sight collected multitudes of spectators. The convention were alarmed. The presiding ordered the doors to be locked, and the keys to be laid upon the table. The drums were beat to alarm in the town. A parcel of ill-armed retainers were gathered together in the street by the earl of Leven. Dundee in the mean time rode off with his party. But when they found themselves secure, the duke of Hamilton adjourned the convention, which relieved the adherents of James from dreadful apprehensions for their own safety. Fifty members retired from Edinburgh; and that circumstance procured an unanimity in all the succeeding resolutions of the convention. Soon after this, it was determined in a committee, that James had forfeited his right to the crown, by which was meant that he had perpetually excluded himself and his whole race from the crown, which was thereby become vacant. This resolution was approved by the convention, and another was drawn up for raising William and Mary to the vacant throne; in consequence of which they were proclaimed at Edinburgh on the 11th of April 1689.

The castle of Edinburgh was still kept, in the name of James, by the duke of Gordon: but despairing of any relief, and pressed by a siege, he surrendered it on the 15th of June, upon honourable terms. The adherents of James, terrified with this unexpected misfortune, now turned their eyes to the viscount Dundee. That nobleman having been in vain urged by the convention to return, they had declared him a fugitive, an outlaw, and a rebel. General Mackay had been sent to Scotland by William with four regiments of foot, and one of dragoons; and Dundee being apprised of his design to surprise him, retired to the Grampian mountains with a few horse. He marched from thence to Gordon castle, where he was joined by the earl of Dunfermline with 50 gentlemen. He then passed through the county of Murray to Inverness. Macdonald of Keppoch lay with 700 men before that town; after having ravaged, in his way from his own country, the lands of the clan of Macintosh. Dundee having promised to the magistrates of Inverness to repay, at the king's return, the money extorted from them by Macdonald, induced the latter to join him with all his men. He could not prevent them, however, from first returning home with their spoil. He accompanied them to Lochaber, and on the 8th of May arrived in Badenoch. From thence he wrote letters to the chiefs of all the clans, appointing them to meet at a general rendezvous in Lochaber, on the 18th of the same month. In the mean time, passing suddenly through Athol, he surprised the town of Perth. In hopes of gaining to his party the two troops of Scots dragoons who lay at Dundee, he marched suddenly to that place; but the fidelity of Captain Balfour, who commanded them, disappointed his views. Having raised the land-tax as he passed, Dundee returned through Athol and Rannoch to hold the diet of rendezvous at Lochaber. Here he was reinforced by several Highland chieftains, so that his army amounted to 1500 men. He pursued Mackay for four days, who had advanced to Inverness, but afterwards retreated to Strathbogie, leaving the whole Highlands exposed to the enemy.

Soon after, however, Dundee found himself surrounded with many difficulties. The officers of the Scots dragoons, who held a secret correspondence with him, wrote him false intelligence, as an excuse for their own fears. They informed him, that a party of Irish, who had endeavoured to land in Scotland, under the duke of Berwick, were driven back, and the duke himself taken prisoner; and that Mackay had been reinforced with a regiment of English horse, and another of foot. On this intelligence, Dundee retreated to Badenoch. The natives of the low country who served in his army quitted him without leave; and the Highlanders plundered the country wherever they came: at last he himself fell sick, while Mackay hovered on his rear. A slight skirmish happened, in which the Highlanders prevailed; but they lost their baggage during the action. Dundee at length arrived at Ruthven; but Mackay being reinforced with a body of 1200 men advanced against him, and other regiments had arrived at Perth and Dumbarton. The Highlanders now deserted every night by hundreds; their gallant leader himself was forced to retire to Lochaber, where only 200 of his whole force remained with him; and to complete his misfortunes, he received at the same time news of the surrender of the castle of Edinburgh.

On the 23rd of June, letters arrived from King James, with a promise of immediate succours from Ireland; upon which Dundee ordered the neighbouring clans to assemble round his standard. But still he had scarce anything but the mere bodies of his men with which he could prosecute the war. The Highlanders were armed only with their own proper weapons, and he had no more than 40 pounds of powder in his whole army. All difficulties, however, were surmounted by the active spirit of the general, for whom the army entertained an enthusiastic zeal. On the 17th of July, he met the king's forces under General Mackay, near at Killiecrankie. An engagement ensued, in which the Highlanders were victorious. Two thousand of Mackay's men were lost either in the field or Britain, in the pursuit; but the victory cost the Highlanders very dear, for their brave general was mortally wounded. He survived the battle, however; and wrote an account of the victory to King James: he even imagined his wound was not mortal; but he died the next morning at Blair. With him ended all the hopes of James in Scotland. Colonel Cannon, who succeeded Dundee in the command, possessed neither his popularity nor his abilities. After some insignificant actions, in which the valour of the soldiers was more conspicuous than the conduct of their leader, the Highlanders dispersed themselves in disgust; and the war soon after ended favourably for William, without any repulse given to his enemies.

During the troubles in England, which had terminated in placing William on the throne, the two parties in Ireland were kept in a kind of tranquillity by their mutual fears. The Protestants were terrified at the prospect of another massacre; and the Papists expected every day to be invaded by the joint force of the English and Dutch. Their terrors, however, were ill founded; for though Tyrconnell sent several messengers to the prince, that he was ready to deliver up the kingdom to any force that might make a surrender decent, his offers were always rejected. William was persuaded by the marquis of Halifax, that should Ireland yield, no pretence could remain for keeping an army in pay; that then, having no army to protect his authority, he might as easily be turned out as he had been brought in; that the English nation could never remain long in a state of good humour; and that he might perceive they already began to be discontented. These insidious arguments induced William to neglect Ireland in such a manner as is justly looked upon to be one of the greatest blemishes in his whole reign. His enemies, indeed, though perhaps without any good foundation, assign a worse cause, viz. that should England be confirmed under his government, Ireland could not long hold out; and that the obstinacy of his Irish enemies would give a pretence for forfeitures, to gratify his English, but especially his foreign friends.

Tyrconnell, disappointed in his views of surrendering Ireland to the prince of Orange, affected to adhere to James. The whole military force of the kingdom at that time amounted only to 4000 men, and of these only 650 were in Dublin; and what was still worse, all of them were so much disposed to quit the service, that the lord deputy was obliged to issue commissions for levying new forces. Upon this, a half-armed rabble, rather than an army, rose suddenly in various parts of the kingdom. Having no pay from the king, they subsisted by depredation, and regarded no discipline. The Protestants in the north armed themselves in their own defence; and the city of Londonderry, relying on its situation, and a flight wall, shut its gates against the new-raised army. Protestant parties in the mean time rose everywhere, declaring their resolution to unite in self-defence, to preserve the Protestant religion, to continue their dependence on England, and to promote the meeting of a free parliament.

To preserve appearances, William now sent General Hamilton, an Irishman and a Roman Catholic, to treat with Tyrconnell; but instead of persuading that lord to yield to William, this messenger advised him to adhere to James. In the meantime James himself assured the lord deputy, that he was ready to fail from Brest with a powerful armament. Hamilton, afflicting spirit from the hopes of this aid, marched against the northern insurgents. They were routed with considerable slaughter at Drumore; and Hillborough, defeated where they had fixed their head-quarters, was taken Drumore, without resistance: the city of Londonderry, however, resolved to hold out to the last extremity.

On the 7th of March 1689, James embarked at Brest. The whole force of his expedition consisted of 14 ships of war, six frigates, and three fire-ships. Twelve hundred of his native subjects in the pay of France, and 100 French officers, composed the whole army of James. He landed at Kinsale without opposition on the 12th of the month, where he was received with the utmost demonstrations of joy. His first care was to secure, in the fort of Kinsale, the money, arms, and ammunition, which he brought from France; and put the town in some posture of defence; which having done, he advanced to Cork. Tyrconnell arrived at this place soon after, and brought intelligence of the rout at Drumore. The king was so much pleased with his attachment and services, that he created him a duke; after which he himself advanced towards Dublin. The condition of the rabble, who poured round him under the name of an army, was not calculated to raise his hopes of success. The most of them were only provided with clubs; some had sticks tipped with iron; and even of those who were best armed, scarce two in a hundred had muskets fit for service. Their very numbers distressed their sovereign, and ruined the country; infomuch that James resolved to disband the greatest part of them. More than 100,000 were already on foot in the different parts of the island. Of these he referred 14 regiments of horse and dragoons, and 35 regiments of foot; the rest he ordered to their respective homes, and armed those that were retained in the best manner he could.

Being received at Dublin with an appearance of universal joy, James proceeded immediately to business. He ordered, by proclamation, all Protestants who had abandoned the kingdom to return. He commanded, in a second proclamation, all Papists, except those in his army, to lay up their arms, and put an end to the robberies and depredations which they had committed in the violence of their zeal. He raised the value of the currency by a proclamation; and he summoned a parliament to meet on the 7th of May, to settle the affairs of the kingdom. The Protestant clergy represented their grievances in an address; and the university of Dublin appeared with complaints and congratulations. He assured the first of his absolute protection, and a full redress; and he promised the latter not only to defend, but even to enlarge, their privileges.

On the 8th of April, James left Dublin, resolving to lead his army against the insurgents in person. They retired before him, and the king laid siege to the city of Londonderry. The besieged made such a vigorous London-derry resistance as has made the place remarkable ever since. But being reduced to the last extremity, they would have been obliged to surrender, had not they been relieved. lieved on the 28th of July by seven ships laden with provisions; upon which the siege was immediately raised.

In the mean time, the distressed situation of James, and his absolute dependence upon France, drove him into measures which otherwise he never would have thought of. His soldiers for some time had been supported by their officers, or subsisted by depredation. The funds of the officers were at last exhausted, and the country itself could no longer bear the riot and injustice of the soldiers. Prefixed by these difficulties, James, by the advice of his council, resolved to coin pieces of copper, which should be received for silver. He saw well enough the inconveniences of this measure: but all Ireland professed not the means of paying the army in current coin to the middle of June. Of the French remittances only 200,000 livres remained; and the king found it absolutely necessary to reserve that sum, to forward his measures with regard to Britain, and to procure intelligence of the motions of his enemies. The army was satisfied even with this appearance of money, and the people received the fictitious coin in hopes of being repaid in a more favourable state of affairs. A tax of 20,000l. a month, granted for 13 months by the parliament, furnished government with an appearance of resources; and in the mean time the king endeavoured to support the former revenue. He opened a trade with France to supply the want of commerce with England. But the French, knowing their own importance, and the necessity of the unfortunate monarch's affairs, claimed and obtained advantages in traffic which offended his own subjects.

To add to the distress of James, Ireland was now invaded by 70,000 men under the command of the duke of Schomberg. They appeared on the 12th of August 1689, in 90 transports, on the coast of Donaghadee, in the county of Down. Next day Schomberg landed without opposition his army, horses, and train of artillery. Having marched to Belfast on the 15th, he continued in that place four days to refresh his troops. He invested Carrickfergus, and threw into it 1000 bombs, which laid the houses in ashes. The garrison having expended their powder to the last barrel, marched out with all the honours of war. But Schomberg's soldiers broke the capitulation. They disarmed and stripped the inhabitants, without any regard to sex or quality; even women, stark naked, were publicly whipped between the lines; and all this under pretence of cruelties of the same kind having been committed by the Papists.

Though Schomberg was an experienced general, who had passed a life of 80 years almost continually in the field, he found himself at a loss how to carry on the war in Ireland. He did not consider the dangers that threatened the health of his troops by confining them too long in one place; and he kept them in a low moist camp near Dundalk, almost without firing of any kind; so that the men fell into fevers and fluxes, and died in great numbers. The enemy were not less afflicted with similar disorders. Both camps remained for some time in sight of each other; and at last, the rainy season approaching, both armies quitted their camps at the same time, and retired into winter-quarters.

The bad success of the campaign, and the miserable situation of the Protestants in Ireland, at length induced William to attempt their relief in person. Accordingly he left London on the 4th of June 1689, and arrived at Carrickfergus on the 14th of that month. From thence he passed to Lisburn, the head quarters of the duke of Schomberg. He reviewed at Lough-Britland his army, which consisted of 36,000 men, and was composed of English, Dutch, Germans, Danes, and French. Being supplied with every necessary, and in high health and spirits, they seemed absolutely certain of victory. The Irish army, having abandoned Ardee at their approach, fell back to the south of the Boyne. On the bank of that river they were joined by James, who had marched from Dublin at the head of his French auxiliaries. The banks of the Boyne were steep; the south side hilly, and fortified with ditches. The river itself was deep, and it rose very high with the tide. These advantages induced James, contrary to the opinion of his officers, to keep possession of this post. His army was inferior in numbers, discipline, and every thing, to his enemies: but flight, he thought, would dispirit his troops, and tarnish his own reputation; he therefore resolved to put the fate of Ireland on the issue of a battle. Urged by his friends in England, and encouraged by a projected invasion of that kingdom, by France, he had resolved to quit Ireland; and to this he was farther encouraged by the assurance of aid from a powerful fleet that had already entered the narrow seas. But the strength of his situation, and the sudden appearance of the enemy, which made even a retreat dangerous, induced him to defer his purpose.

William was no sooner arrived, than he rode along the river's side, in sight of both armies, to make proper observations on the plan of battle; but in the meantime, being perceived by the enemy, a cannon was privately brought out and planted against him where he was sitting. The shot killed several of his followers, and he himself was wounded in the shoulder. The news of his being slain was instantly propagated through the Irish camp, and even sent off to Paris; but William, as soon as his wound was dressed, rode through the camp, and quickly undeceived his army.

The next day (June 30th) the battle began at six in the morning. James's forces behaved with great feated resolution, but were at last defeated with the loss of 1500 men. The Protestants lost but about one third of that number; but among these was their brave general the duke of Schomberg. He was killed by a discharge from his own troops, who, not knowing that he had been accidentally hurried into the midst of the enemy, fired upon the body of men who surrounded him. During the action, James stood on the hill of Dunmore, surrounded with some squadrons of horse; and at intervals was heard to exclaim, when he saw his own troops repulsing those of the enemy, "O spare my English subjects!" While his troops were yet fighting, he quitted his station; and leaving orders to guard the pass at Duleek, made the best of his way to Dublin. He advised the magistrates of that city to make the best terms they could with the victors; and France, he himself set out for Waterford, where he immediately embarked for France. When he first deserted his troops at the Boyne, O'Regan, an old Irish captain, was heard Britain. to say, "That if the English would exchange generals, the conquered army would fight them over again."

The victory at the Boyne was by no means decisive, and the friends of James resolved to continue their opposition to William. Sarsfield, a popular and experienced general, put himself at the head of the army that had been routed at the Boyne, and went farther into the country to defend the banks of the river Shannon. James appointed one St Ruth to command over Sarsfield, which gave the Irish universal discontent. On the other hand, General Ginkle, who had been appointed to command the English army in the absence of William, who was gone over to England, advanced towards the Shannon to meet the enemy. The only place where it was fordable was at Athlone, a strong walled town built on both sides of the river, and in the hands of King James's party. The English soon made themselves masters of that part which was on the hither side of the river; but the part on the opposite bank being defended with great vigour, was for a long while thought impregnable. At length it was resolved in a council of war, that a body of forlorn hope should ford the stream in the face of the enemy; and this desperate enterprise was performed with great resolution; the enemy were driven from their works, and the town surrendered at discretion. St Ruth marched his army to its relief, but he came too late; for he no sooner approached, than his own guns were turned against him; upon which he instantly marched off, and took post at Aughrim, at ten miles distance, where he determined to wait the English army. Ginkle did not decline the combat, though he had only 18,000 men, while the Irish were above 25,000.

A desperate engagement ensued; but at last St Ruth being killed, his troops gave way on all sides, and retreated to Limerick, where they determined to make a final stand, after having lost near 5000 of their best men.

Ginkle, wishing to put an end to the war at once, suffered as many of the Irish as chose to retire to Limerick. In this last retreat the Irish forces made a brave defence. The siege commenced August 25, 1691. Six weeks were spent before the place without any decisive effect. The garrison was well supplied with provisions, and provided with all means of defence. The winter was approaching, and Ginkle had orders to finish the war upon any terms. He therefore offered such conditions as the Irish, had they been victors, could scarce have refused with prudence. He agreed, that all in arms should receive their pardon: that their estates should be restored, their attainders annulled, and their outlawries reversed; that none should be liable for debts incurred through deeds done in the course of hostilities: that all Roman Catholics should enjoy the same toleration with regard to their religion as in the reign of Charles II.: that the gentry should be permitted to make use of arms: that the inferior sort should be allowed to exercise their callings, and professions: that no oaths but that of allegiance should be required of high or low: that should the troops, or any number of them, choose to retire into any foreign service, they should be conveyed to the continent, at the expense of the king. Sarsfield, who had obtained the title of earl of Lucan from James after his abdication, was permitted to retain a dignity which the laws could not recognize. The lords justices had arrived from Dublin on the first of October. They signed the articles together with Ginkle; and thus the Irish Papists put a happy period to a war which threatened their party with absolute ruin. In consequence of this treaty, about 14,000 of those who had fought for King James went over to France, having transports provided by government for conveying them thither. When they arrived, James thanked them for their loyalty, and told them that they should still fight for their old master; and that he had obtained an order from the king of France for their being new clothed, and put into quarters of refreshment. In this manner all James's expectations from Ireland were entirely frustrated, and the kingdom submitted quietly to the English government.

In the beginning of the year 1692, an action of unprecedented barbarity disgraced the government of William of Glencoe in Scotland. In the preceding August, in consequence of a pacification with the Highlanders, a proclamation of indemnity had been issued to such insurgents as should take the oaths to the king and queen, on or before the last day of December. The chiefs of the few tribes who had been in arms for James complied soon after with the proclamation: but Macdonald of Glencoe failed in submitting within the limited time; more, however, from accident than design. In the end of December, he came to Colonel Hill, who commanded the garrison in Fort William, to take the oaths of allegiance to the government. Hill having furnished Macdonald with a letter to Sir Colin Campbell, sheriff of the county of Argyle, directed him to repair immediately to Inverary, to make his submission in a legal manner before that magistrate. The way to Inverary lay through almost impassable mountains; the season was extremely rigorous, and the whole country covered with a deep snow. So eager, however, was Macdonald to take the oaths, before the limited time should expire, that though the road lay within half a mile of his own house, he would not stop to visit his family. After various obstructions, he arrived at Inverary. The time was elapsed, and the sheriff hesitated to receive his submission; but Macdonald prevailed on him by his importunities, and even tears. Sir John Dalrymple, afterwards earl of Stair, attended King William as secretary of state for Scotland. He took advantage of Macdonald's neglecting to take the oaths within the time prescribed, and procured from the king a warrant of military execution against him and his whole tribe. As a mark of his own eagerness, or to save Dalrymple, William signed the warrant both above and below, with his own hand. The secretary, in letters expressive of a brutal ferocity of mind, urged the officers who commanded in the Highlands to execute their orders with the utmost rigour. Campbell of Glenlyon, a captain in Argyle's regiment, and two subalterns, were ordered with 120 men to repair to Glencoe on the first of February. Campbell, being uncle to young Macdonald's wife, was received by the father with all manner of friendship and hospitality. The men were treated in the houses of his tenants with free quarters and kind entertainment. Till the 13th of the month, the troops lived in good humour and familiarity with the people. The officers on the very night of the massacre passed the evening and played at cards in Macdonald's house. In the night, Lieutenant... Britain. Lieutenant Lindsay, with a party of soldiers, called in a friendly manner at his door. He was instantly admitted. Macdonald, as he was rising to receive his guests, was shot dead behind his back with two bullets. His wife had already put on her clothes; but she was stripped naked by the soldiers, who tore the rings off her fingers with their teeth. The slaughter became general. To prevent the pity of the soldiers to their hosts, their quarters had been changed the night before. Neither age nor infirmity was spared. Some women, in defending their children, were killed; boys imploring mercy, were shot by officers, on whose knees they hung. In one place, nine persons, as they sat enjoying themselves at table, were shot dead by the soldiers. In Inverriggen, in Campbell's own quarters, nine men were first bound by the soldiers, and then shot at intervals, one by one. Near 40 persons were massacred by the troops. Several who fled to the mountains perished by famine and the inclemency of the season. Those who escaped owed their lives to a tempestuous night.

Lieutenant-colonel Hamilton, who had the charge of the execution from Dalrymple, was on his march with 400 men, to guard all the passes from the valley of Glencoe; but was obliged to stop by the severity of the weather; which proved the safety of the unfortunate tribe. He entered the valley next day; laid all the houses in ashes; and carried away all the cattle and spoil, which were divided among the officers and soldiers.

It can scarcely be imagined that a massacre attended with such circumstances of treachery and breach of the laws of hospitality, could pass without some animadversion; though the expressions of Cunningham, a writer very partial to the character of King William, seem to account it a fault that it should ever have been inquired into. "Mr James Johnstone, one of the secretaries of state (says he), from motives of revenge, caused the affair of Glencoe to be laid before parliament. This being somewhat disingenuously managed, was the occasion of much trouble to many people. The earl of Breadalbin was committed to the castle of Edinburgh; but the lord viscount Stair, who lay under some suspicion on that account, in a very artful speech endeavoured to resolve the whole matter into a misapprehension of dates; which, he alleged, had led both the actor in the slaughter complained of, and those who now accused him, into mistakes. In conclusion he affirmed, that neither the king nor any other person was to be blamed, save only the misled captain, who did not rightly understand the orders that had been given him."

The most disgraceful circumstances of the massacre are by the same author concealed; as he only tells us, that "it unhappily fell out, that the whole clan of Glencoe, being somewhat too late in making their submission to King William, were put to the sword by the hands and orders of Captain Campbell; which gave great offence to the king. It is certain the king had cause of resentment against some of his courtiers on account of this foul action; but he thought fit not to question them for it till he could settle himself more firmly on the throne."

It is not improbable, that partly to efface the remembrance of this massacre, and the sham inquiry above mentioned, the king now caused his commissioner to declare in the Scots parliament (the same that had inquired into the affair of Glencoe), "That if the members found it would tend to the advancement of trade that an act should be passed for the encouragement of such as should acquire and establish a plantation in Africa, America, or any other part of the world where plantations might be lawfully acquired, that his majesty was willing to declare he would grant to the subjects of this kingdom, in favour of these plantations, such rights and privileges as he granted, in like cases, to the subjects of his other dominions." Relying on this and other flattering promises, the nobility and gentry of Scotland advanced 400,000l. towards the establishment of a company for carrying on an East and West India trade; and 1200 veterans who had served in King William's wars were sent to effect a settlement on the peninsula of Darien, which lies between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, and in the narrowest place is not above 60 miles over; and of consequence is equally well adapted for trading with both the Indies.

The new colony was well received by the natives, and matters began to wear a promising aspect, when the king, on the earnest solicitations of the English and Dutch East India Companies, resolved to gratify the latter at the expense of his Scottish subjects; and knowing that the new colony must want supplies of provisions, he sent orders to the governor of Jamaica and the English settlements in America to issue proclamations, prohibiting, under the severest penalties, all his majesty's subjects from holding any correspondence with the Scotch colony, or afflicting it in any shape with arms, ammunition, or provisions: "Thus (says Mr Knox) the king's heart was hardened against these new settlers, whom he abandoned to their fate, though many of them had been covered with wounds in fighting his battles.

"Thus vanished all the hopes of the Scottish nation, which had engaged in this design with incredible alacrity, and with the most sanguine expectations that the misfortunes of their country would, by this new channel of commerce, be completely healed.

"The distresses of the people, upon receiving authentic accounts of the fortune of their colony, scarcely admit of any description. They were not only disappointed in their expectations of wealth and a renewal of their commerce, but hundreds, who had ventured their all, were absolutely ruined by the miscarriage of the design.

"The whole nation seemed to join in the clamour that was raised against their sovereign. They taxed him with double dealing, inhumanity, and base ingratitude, to a people who had lavished their treasure and bled blood in support of his government, and in the gratification of his ambition; and had their power been equal to their acrimony, in all probability the island would have been involved in a civil war."

Such is the account of this transaction given by Mr Knox; on the other hand, Mr Cunningham tells us, that "the same parliament (which had inquired into the Glencoe affair) also had under their consideration a scheme for settling a trade and planting a colony in America, which proved afterwards an occasion of manifold evils, and was matter of great complaint both to the English and the Spaniards. The Scots, carrying on the settlement of the colony which has been just mentioned with extravagant parade, and noise, and subscriptions, filled not only England but all other countries..." countries also, with apprehensions lest Scotland should, in process of time, become the emporium of all the trade of Europe. But they never considered how few would trust their fortunes to the disposal of such a numerous nobility, nor calculated the frauds of their own managers; by which means the whole affair was afterwards ruined. Discord arising on this head between the two kingdoms, old hostilities were recalled to mind; the cattle were driven off from the borders; the customs were defrauded, and other injuries committed; and at last the Spaniards complained of the Scots. Therefore, to prevent the mischief which might arise to both kingdoms, the king had nothing so much at heart as to bring about an union upon as fair terms as he could," &c.

The total reduction of Ireland, and the dispersion and extermination of the Highland chieftains who favoured his cause, did not entirely put an end to the hopes of James. His chief expectations next were founded on a conspiracy among his English adherents, and in the succours promised him by the French king. A plot was first formed in Scotland by Sir James Montgomery; a person who, from being an adherent to William, now turned against him: but as the project was ill contrived, so it was as lightly discovered by the instigator. To this another succeeded, which seemed to threaten more serious consequences, as it was managed by the Whig party, who were the most formidable in the state. A number of these joined themselves to the Tories, and both made advances to the adherents of the late king. They assembled together; and the result of their deliberations was, that the restoration of James was to be effected entirely by foreign forces: that he should fail for Scotland, and be there joined by 5000 Swedes; who, because they were of the Protestant religion, would, it was thought, remove a part of the odium which attended an invasion by foreigners: it was concerted that assistance should at the same time be sent from France, and that full liberty of conscience should be proclaimed throughout the kingdom. In order to lose no time, it was resolved to send over to France two trusty persons to consult with the banished monarch; and Lord Preston and Mr Ashton were the two persons appointed for this embassy. Both of them, however, were seized, when they least expected it, by order of Lord Caernarvon. Both were condemned; and Ashton was executed without making any confession; but Lord Preston had not the same resolution. Upon an offer of pardon, he discovered a great number of associates; among whom the duke of Ormond, Lord Dartmouth, and Lord Clarendon, were foremost.

The French at last became sensible of their bad policy in not having better supported the cause of James, and therefore resolved to make a descent upon England in his favour. In pursuance of this scheme, the French king supplied James with an army consisting of a body of French troops, some English and Scots refugees, and the Irish regiments which had been transported into France from Limerick, and were now become excellent soldiers by long discipline and severe duty. This army was assembled between Cherbourg and La Hogue, and commanded by King James in person. More than 300 transports were provided for landing it on the opposite coast; and Tourville, the French admiral, at the head of 63 ships of the line, was appointed to favour the descent. His orders were, at all events, to attack the enemy, in case they should oppose him; so that every thing promised the banished king a change of fortune.

These preparations on the side of France were soon known at the English court, and every precaution taken for a vigorous opposition. All the secret machinations of the banished king's adherents were discovered to the English ministry by spies; and by these they found that the Tories were more faithful than even the Whigs who had placed King William on the throne. The duke of Marlborough, Lord Godolphin, and even the princess Anne herself, were violently suspected of disaffection. Preparations, however, were made with great tranquillity and resolution, to reflect the growing storm. Admiral Ruffel was ordered to put to sea with all possible expedition; and he soon appeared with 99 ships of the line, besides frigates and fire-ships. At the head of this formidable fleet he set sail for the coast of France; and, near La Hogue, he discovered the enemy under Tourville, who prepared to give him battle. The engagement began between the two admirals with great fury, and the rest of the fleet soon followed their example. The battle lasted for ten hours; but at last victory declared on the side of numbers: the French defeated, fled for Conquet road, having lost four ships in the first day's action. The pursuit continued for two days following: three French ships of the line were destroyed the next day; and 18 more, which had taken refuge in the bay of La Hogue, were burnt by Sir George Rooke. In this manner were all the French preparations frustrated; and so decisive was the blow, that from this time France seemed to relinquish all claims to the ocean.

This engagement, which happened on the 21st of May 1692, put a final period to the hopes of James. No further attempts were made in his favour, except some plots to assassinate King William, which ended only in the destruction of those who formed them. But it was never thoroughly proved that James countenanced these plots in the least; it rather appears, that in all cases he expressed the utmost abhorrence of such attempts. In 1697, the abbé de Polignac, ambassador from France in Poland, wrote to his master, that the thoughts were entertained of the late king of Britain, crown of the new election which happened on the death of Poland; John Sobieski king of Poland; and that James had been already named by some of the diets as his successor. Louis was eager to seize an opportunity of ridding himself with honour of a prince whose pretensions he could no longer support. The friends of which he James were also sanguine for the project; but he himself refused it. He told them, that "he would ever retain a grateful remembrance of his friends in Poland. That, however, he would not accept of the crown, had it actually been offered; much less would he endeavour to obtain by solicitation any crown which was not actually his due. That his acceptance of any other sceptre would amount to an abdication indeed of that which he deemed his right. That therefore he was resolved to remain in his present forlorn condition, professing less hopes than ever of being restored, rather than to do the least act of prejudice to his family." The same year, at an interview between King William and Louis Louis XIV. it was proposed that the prince of Wales (James's son) should succeed to the throne of England after the death of William. The king with little hesitation agreed to this request. He even solemnly engaged to procure the repeal of the act of settlement; and to declare, by another, the prince of Wales his successor to the throne. Even this proposal was rejected by James. He told the king of France, that though he could suffer with patience the usurpation of his nephew upon his right, he would never permit his own son to be guilty of the same injustice. He urged, that should the son reign in his father's lifetime, that circumstance would amount to a formal renunciation: that the prince of Wales, by succeeding to the throne of Orange, would yield his sole right, which was that of his father, &c.

From this time James lost every hope of being restored to the throne, and resigned himself entirely to the austerities of religious enthusiasm. His constitution, though vigorous and athletic, had for some time begun to yield to the infirmities of age, and to that melancholy which superstition as well as his uncommon misfortunes had impressed on his mind. In the beginning of September 1701, when he was, according to his daily custom, at public prayers, he fell suddenly into a lethargy; and though he recovered his senses soon after, he languished for some days, and expired on the 6th of September. The French king, with great humanity, paid him several visits during his sickness; and exhibited every symptom of compassion, affection, and even respect.

Louis, being under a difficulty how to proceed upon the unexpected death of James, called a council to take their advice, whether he should own the prince of Wales as king of Great Britain and Ireland. The king himself had hesitated long in this delicate point. But the dauphin, the duke of Burgundy, and all the princes of the blood, declared, that it was unbecoming the dignity of the crown of France not to own that the titles of the father devolved immediately upon the son. Louis approved of this resolution, and determined to acquaint the dying king with it in person. When he arrived at St Germain, he acquainted first the queen, and then her son, of his design. He then approached the bed in which James lay almost insensible with his disorder. The king, rising himself, began to thank his most Christian majesty for all his favours; but Louis interrupted him. "Sir (said he), what I have done is but a small matter; but what I have to say is of the utmost importance." The people then began to retire. "Let no person withdraw (said Louis). I come to acquaint you, Sir, that when God shall please to call your majesty from this world, I shall take your family into my protection, and acknowledge your son, as he then will certainly be, king of Great Britain and Ireland."

Though the defeat of the French fleet at La Hogue had put King William out of all danger from any further attempt from that quarter, he by no means possessed his throne with any kind of tranquillity. The want of a common enemy produced dissensions among the people, and William began to find as much uneasiness from his parliament at home as from an enemy in the field. The uneasiness he felt from the refractory disposition of his subjects was not a little heightened by the death of his queen, who was taken off by the smallpox on the 28th of December 1694. For some time he was under a sincere concern for her loss; but as politics had taken entire possession of his mind, he lost all other concerns in the greatness of his apprehensions for the balance of power and the fluctuating interests of Europe.

His chief motive for accepting the crown was to engage England more deeply in the concerns of Europe, discontent. His great object had been to humble the French, and all his politics consisted in forming alliances against them. On the other hand, many of the English had no such animosity against the French: and these, therefore, considered the interest of the nation as sacrificed to foreign connexions; and complained that the continental war fell most heavily on them, though they had the least interest in its success. These complaints were heard by William with the most phlegmatic indifference; he employed all his attention only on the balance of power, and the interests of Europe. He became unmindful of the cultivation of internal policy, and, as he formed alliances abroad, increased the influence of party at home. Patriotism began to be ridiculed as an ideal virtue; and the practice of bribing a majority in parliament became universal. The example of the great was caught up by the vulgar; principle, and even decency, was gradually banished; talents lay uncultivated, and the ignorant and profligate were received into favour.

The king, upon accepting the crown, was resolved to preserve as much of the prerogative as possible; and he sometimes exerted a branch of it which his predecessors had never chosen to make use of, viz. the power of refusing his assent to some bills that had passed both houses. From this and other causes there were perpetual bickerings between him and his parliaments. At last William became fatigued with opposition. He admitted every restraint upon the prerogative in England, upon condition of being properly supplied with the means of humbling France. Provided the parliament supplied him with the means of executing this, he permitted them to rule the internal policy as they pleased. For the prosecution of the French war, the sums granted were indeed incredible. The nation, not contented with furnishing him such sums of money as they were capable of raising by the taxes of the year, mortgaged those taxes, and involved themselves in debts which they have never since been able to discharge.

The war with France continued during the greatest part of this king's reign; but at length the treaty of Ryswick, in 1697, put an end to those contentions in which England had engaged without policy, and came off at last without advantage. In the general pacification, her interests seemed entirely deserted; and for all the treasures she had sent to the continent, and all the blood which had been shed there, the only equivalent received was an acknowledgment of William's title from the king of France.

The king, being now freed from a foreign war, let William himself to strengthen his authority at home. As he could not bear the thoughts of being a king without disbanded his military command, he conceived hopes of keeping up, in the time of a profound peace, those forces which had been granted during the time of danger. The commons, however, to his great mortification, passed a vote, that Britain, that all the forces in the English pay, exceeding 7000 men, should be forthwith disbanded; and that those retained should be natural-born subjects of England. With this vote the king was exceedingly displeased. His indignation, indeed, was kindled to such a degree, that he actually conceived a design of abandoning the government. From this, however, his ministers diverted him, and persuaded him to consent to the passing of the bill.

These altercations continued during the remainder of this reign. William considered the commons as a body of men desirous of power for themselves, and consequently bent upon obstructing all his projects to secure the liberties of Europe. He seemed but little attached to any particular party in the house, all of whom he found at times deserted or opposed him. He therefore veered to Whigs and Tories indiscriminately, as interest or the immediate exigence demanded. He considered England as a place of labour, anxiety, and altercation. If he had any time for amusement or relaxation, he retired to Loo in Holland, where, among a few friends, he gave a loose to those coarse festivities which alone he was capable of relishing. Here he planned the different succession of the princes of Europe, and laboured to undermine the schemes and the power of Louis his rival in politics and fame.

But however feeble William's desire of other amusements might be, he scarce could live without being at variance with France. Peace had scarcely been made with that nation, when he began to think of resources for carrying on a new war, and for enlisting his English subjects in the confederacy against that nation. Several arts were used for inducing the people to second his aims; and the whole nation seemed at last to join in defining a French war. He had been in Holland concerting with his allies operations for a new campaign. He had engaged in a negociation with the prince of Hesse; who assured him, that if he would besiege and take Cadiz, the admiral of Castile and several other grandees of Spain would declare for the house of Austria. The elector of Hanover had resolved to concur in the same measures; the king of the Romans, and Prince Louis of Baden, undertook to invest Landau, while the emperor promised to send a powerful reinforcement into Italy; but death put a period to his projects and his ambition.

William was naturally of a very feeble constitution; and it was by this time almost quite exhausted by a series of continual disquietude and action. He had endeavoured to repair his constitution, or at least to conceal its decays, by exercise and riding. On the 21st of February 1702, in riding to Hampton-court from Kensington, his horse fell under him; and he was thrown with such violence, that his collar-bone was fractured. His attendants conveyed him to the palace at Hampton-court, where the fracture was reduced; and in the evening he returned to Kensington in his coach. The jolting of the carriage disunited the fracture; and the bones were again replaced by Bidloo his physician. This, in a robust constitution, would have been a trifling misfortune; but to him it was fatal. For some time he appeared in a fair way of recovery; but falling asleep on his couch, was seized with a shivering, which terminated in a fever and diarrhoea, that soon became dangerous and desperate. Perceiving his end approaching, the objects of his former care lay next his heart; and the fate of Europe seemed to remove the sensations he might be supposed to feel for his own. The earl of Albemarle arriving from Holland, he conferred with him in private on the posture of affairs abroad. Two days after, having received the sacrament from Archbishop Tenison, he expired on Sunday March 8th; having lived 52 years, and reigned 13. —He was in his person of a middle stature, a thin body, and a delicate constitution. He had an aquiline nose, sparkling eyes, a large forehead, and a grave solemn aspect. He left behind him the character of a great politician, though he had never been popular; and of a formidable general, though he had been seldom victorious. His deportment was grave, phlegmatic, and full; nor did he ever show any fire but in the day of battle.

Cunningham says, that "at the very last moment, when his mind was otherwise oppresed, he retained a just sense of the redemption of mankind, and the remembrance of his good subjects. Thus he lay so quietly and composed, with his eyes fixed upon heaven, when his speech failed him, that no man could die either better prepared, or with greater constancy and piety, than this prince; of whose just praises no tongue shall be silent, and no time unmindful. And if any king be ambitious of regulating his councils and actions by the bright examples of the most famous great men, he may form to himself the idea of a great prince and a grand empire, not only from the king's life, but from the public records of the English and Dutch nations."

William was succeeded by the princess Anne, who had married George prince of Denmark. She ascended the throne in the 38th year of her age, to the general satisfaction of all parties. William had died at the eve of a war with France; and the present queen, who generally took the advice of her ministry on every important occasion, was now urged by opposite councils; a part of her ministry being inclined to war and another to peace. At the head of those who opposed a war with France was the earl of Rochester, lord lieutenant of Ireland, first cousin to the queen, and the chief of the Tory faction. At the head of the opposite party was the earl afterwards duke of Marlborough, and since so much renowned for his victories over the French. After giving the reasons for both their opinions, that of Marlborough preponderated: the queen resolved to declare war; and communicating her intentions to the house of commons, by whom it was approved, war was proclaimed accordingly. In this declaration of war, Louis was taxed with having taken possession of red against a great part of the Spanish dominions; with designing France to invade the liberties of Europe, to obstruct the freedom of navigation and commerce; and with having offered an unpardonable insult to the queen and her throne, by acknowledging the title of the Pretender: he was accused of attempting to unite the crown of Spain to his own dominions, by placing his grandson upon the throne of that kingdom, and thus of endeavouring to destroy the equality of power that subsisted among the states of Europe. This declaration of war on the part of England was seconded by similar declarations by the Dutch and Germans, all on the same day.

Louis XIV, whose power had been greatly circumscribed scribed by William, expected on the death of the latter to enter on a field open for new conquests and fame. At the news of the English monarch's death, therefore, he could not suppress his rapture; the people of Paris, and indeed through the whole kingdom, testified their joy in the most public manner. At seeing, therefore, such a combination against him, the French monarch was filled with indignation; but his resentment fell chiefly on the Dutch. He declared with great emotion that as for those gentlemen pedlars the Dutch, they should one day repent their insolence and presumption in declaring war against him whose power they had formerly felt and dreaded. By these threats, however, the affairs of the allies were no way influenced. Marlborough was appointed general of the British forces, and by the Dutch he was chosen generalissimo of the allied army; and indeed his after conduct showed, that no person could possibly have been chosen with greater propriety. He had learned the first rudiments of war under the famous Marshal Turenne, having been a volunteer in his army; and by that general his future greatness was prognosticated.

The first attempt that Marlborough made to deviate from the general practices of the army was to advance the subaltern officers, whose merits had been hitherto neglected. Regardless of seniority, wherever he found abilities he was sure to promote them; and thus he had all the upper ranks of commanders rather remarkable for their skill and talents than for their age and experience. In his first campaign, in the beginning of July 1702, he repaired to the camp at Nimeguen, where he found himself at the head of 60,000 men well provided with all necessaries, and long disciplined by the best officers of the age. He was opposed on the part of France by the duke of Burgundy, a youth of very little experience in the art of war; but the real acting general was the marshal Boufflers, an officer of courage and activity. But wherever Marlborough advanced, the French were obliged to retire before him, leaving all Spanish Guelderland at his discretion. The duke of Burgundy finding himself obliged to retreat before the allied army, rather than expose himself longer to such a mortifying indignity, returned to Versailles, leaving Boufflers to command alone. Boufflers retired to Brabant; and Marlborough ended the campaign by taking the city of Liege; in which was found an immense sum of money and a vast number of prisoners.

This good fortune seemed to console the nation for some unsuccessful expeditions at sea. Sir John Munden had permitted a French squadron of 14 ships to escape him by taking shelter in the harbour of Corunna; for which he was dismissed the service by Prince George. An attempt was made upon Cadiz by sea and land, Sir George Rooke commanding the navy, and the duke of Ormond the land forces; but this also miscarried. At Vigo, however, the British arms were attended with better success. The duke of Ormond landed with 2500 men at the distance of six miles from the city, while the fleet forcing their way into the harbour, the French fleet that had taken refuge there were burned by the enemy to prevent their falling into the hands of the English. Eight ships were thus burned and run aground; but ten ships of war were taken, together with eleven galleons, and above a million of money in silver. In the West Indies, Admiral Benbow had been stationed with ten ships to distress the enemy's trade. Being informed that Du Caste the French admiral was in those seas with a force equal to his own, he resolved to attack Bravery him; and soon after discovered the enemy's squadron and death near St Martha fleering along the shore. He quickly gave orders to his captains, formed the line of battle, and the engagement began. He found, however, that the rest of the fleet had taken some disgust at his conduct; and they permitted him to sustain, almost alone, the whole fire of the enemy. Nevertheless, the engagement continued till night, and he determined to renew it next morning. But he had the mortification to perceive that all the rest of his ships had fallen back except one, who joined him in urging the pursuit of the enemy. Four days this intrepid seaman, assisted by only one ship, pursued and engaged the enemy, while his cowardly officers remained at a distance behind. His last day's battle was more furious than any of the former: alone, and unsupported by any of the rest, he engaged the whole French squadron; when his leg was shattered by a cannon-ball, and he himself died soon after his wounds. Two of his cowardly associates were shot on their arrival in England; one died on his passage thither; the rest were disgraced.

The next parliament, which was convened by the queen, was highly pleased with the success of the British arms on the continent. The house of commons was composed chiefly of Tories, who voted 40,000 feet Continental men, and the like number of land forces, to act in conjunction with those of the allies. Soon after, the queen informed her parliament, that she was pressed by the allies to augment her forces; and upon this it was resolved that 10,000 more men should be added to the continental army, but on condition that the Dutch should immediately break off all commerce with France and Spain; a condition which was very readily complied with.

In the beginning of April 1703, the duke of Marlborough crossed the sea, and assembling the allied army, Marlborough opened the campaign with the siege of Bonn, the residence of the elector of Cologne. This held out but a short time. He next retook Huy; the garrison of which, after a vigorous defence, surrendered prisoners of war. Limburgh was next besieged, and surrendered in two days; and thus the campaign concluded, the allies having secured the country of Liege and the electorate of Cologne from the designs of the enemy.

In the campaign of 1704, the duke of Marlborough informed the Dutch that it was his intention to march to the relief of the empire, which had been for some time oppressed by the French forces; and the States gave him full powers to march as he thought proper, with assurances of their assistance in all his endeavours. The French king, finding Boufflers no longer capable of opposing Marlborough, appointed the marshal de Villeroy to command in his place. But Marlborough, who, like Hannibal of old, was remarkable for studying the disposition of his antagonists, having no great fears from Villeroy, immediately flew to the assistance of the emperor. Taking with him about 13,000 British troops, he advanced by hasty marches to the banks of the Danube; he defeated a body of French and Bavarians stationed at Donauret to oppose him; then passed the river, and laid under contribution the dukedom of of Bavaria which had sided with the enemy. Villeroy, who at first attempted to follow his motions, seemed all at once to have lost sight of his enemy; nor was he apprised of his route till informed of his successes. But, in the mean time, Marshal Tallard prepared by another route to obstruct Marlborough's retreat with an army of 30,000 men. He was soon after joined by the duke of Bavaria's forces; so that the French army in that part of the continent amounted to 60,000 veterans, commanded by the two best reputed generals then in France.

To oppose these powerful generals, the duke of Marlborough was joined by a body of 30,000 men under the celebrated Prince Eugene. The allied army, with this reinforcement, amounted to about 52,000. After various marches and countermarches, the two armies met at Blenheim*. A terrible engagement ensued, in which the French were entirely defeated, and a country of 100 leagues extent fell into the hands of the conquerors. Soon after finishing the campaign, the duke repaired to Berlin, where he procured a reinforcement of 8000 Prussians to serve under Prince Eugene in Italy. Thence he proceeded to negotiate for succours at the court of Hanover; and soon after returned to England, where he was received with every possible demonstration of joy.

The arms of Britain, in the mean time, were not less fortunate by sea than by land. The town of Gibraltar was taken by the prince of Hesse and Sir George Rooke; but so little was the value of the conquest at that time understood, that it was for some time in debate whether it was a capture worth thanking the admiral for; and at last it was considered as unworthy of public gratitude. Soon after, the British fleet, to the number of 53 ships of the line, came up with that of France, consisting of 52 men of war, commanded by the count de Thouloffe, off the coast of Malaga. This was the last great naval engagement in which the French ventured to face the British on equal terms. The battle began at ten in the forenoon, and continued with great fury for six hours; when the van of the French began to give way. The British admiral for two days attempted to renew the engagement; but this was as cautiously declined by the French, who at last disappeared totally. Both sides claimed the victory, but the consequence decided it in favour of the British.

In the mean time, the Spaniards, alarmed at the taking of Gibraltar, sent the marquis of Villadurias with a large army to retake it. France also sent a fleet of 13 ships of the line; but part of them were dispersed by a tempest, and part taken by the British. Nor was the land army more successful. The siege continued for four months; during which time the prince of Hesse, who commanded the town for the English, gave many proofs of valour. At length, the Spaniards having attempted to scale the rock in vain, finding no hopes of taking the place, were contented to draw off their men and abandon the enterprise.

While the British were thus victorious by land and sea, a new scene of contention was opened on the side of Spain. Philip V., grandson of Louis XIV., had been placed on the throne of that kingdom, and received with the joyful concurrence of the greatest part of his subjects. He had also been nominated successor to the crown by the late king of Spain's will. But in a former treaty among the powers of Europe, Charles, son of the emperor of Germany, was appointed heir to that crown; and this treaty had been guaranteed by France herself, though she now resolved to reverse that consent in favour of a descendant of the house of Bourbon. Charles was still farther led on to put in for the crown of Spain, by the invitation of the Catalonians, who declared in his favour; and with the assistance of the British and Portuguese, promised to arm in his cause. Upon his way to his newly assumed dominions, he landed in England; where he was received on shore by the dukes of Somerset and Marlborough, who conducted him to Windsor. He was kindly received by the queen; and furnished with 200 transports, 30 ships fitted out of war, and 9000 men, for the conquest of that extensive empire. The earl of Peterborough, a man of romantic bravery, offered to conduct them; and his single service was reckoned equivalent to armies.

The first attempt of this general was on the city of Barcelona, at that time defended by a garrison of 5000 men. The fort Montjuic, situated on a hill that commanded the city, was attacked; the outworks were taken by storm, and the powder-magazine was blown up by a shell; upon which the fort immediately surrendered, and the city capitulated in a short time after. The conquest of all Valencia succeeded the taking of Barcelona. Charles became master of Arragon, Carthagena, Granada, and Madrid. The British general entered the capital in triumph, and there proclaimed Charles king of Spain without opposition.

To these successes, however, very little regard was paid in Britain. The victories of the duke of Marlborough alone engrossed their attention. In 1706, he opened the campaign with an army of 80,000 men. He was met by the French under Villeroy near the village of Ramillies*. An engagement ensued, in which the duke gained a victory almost as complete as that of Blenheim had been; and the whole country of Brabant was the reward of the victors. The French troops were now dispirited; the city of Paris was in confusion; Louis, who had long been flattered with conquest, was now humbled to such a degree as almost to excite the compassion of his enemies. He intreated for peace, but in vain; the allies carried all before them; and Louis, in vain for his very capital began to dread the approach of the conquerors. But what neither his armies nor his politics could effect, was brought about by a party in England. The division between the Whigs and Tories saved France, that now seemed tottering on the brink of ruin.

The councils of the queen had hitherto been governed by a Whig ministry; for though the duke of Marlborough started in the interest of the opposite party, still he soon joined the Whigs, as he found them most sincere in the design of humbling France. The people, however, were now in fact beginning to change, and a general spirit of Toryism to take place. The queen's personal virtues, her successes, her deference for the clergy, and their great veneration for her, began to have a prevailing influence over the whole nation. People of every rank were not ashamed to defend the most fervent tenets, when they tended to flatter or increase the power of the sovereign. They argued in favour of strict hereditary succession, divine right, and non-resistance to the regal power. The Tories, though joining in vigorous vigorously measures against France, were never ardently their enemies: they rather secretly hated the Dutch, as of principles very opposite to their own; and longed for an opportunity of withdrawing from their friendship. They began to meditate schemes of opposition to the duke of Marlborough. Him they considered as a self-interested man, who sacrificed the real advantages of the nation, in protracting a ruinous war for his own private emolument and glory. They saw their country oppressed with an increasing load of taxes, which by a continuance of the war must inevitably become an intolerable burden. Their discontent began to spread, and the Tories wanted only a few determined leaders to assist them in removing the present ministry.

In the mean time, a succession of losses began to dissipate the conquering frenzy that had seized the nation in general, and to incline them to wish for peace. The earl of Galway, who commanded the army in Spain, was utterly defeated at Almanza* by the duke of Berwick; and in consequence of this victory, all Spain, except the province of Catalonia, returned to their duty to Philip their lawful sovereign. An attempt was made upon Toulon, by the duke of Savoy and Prince Eugene by land, and an English fleet by sea; but to no purpose. The fleet under Sir Cloudley Shovel, having set sail for England, was driven by a violent storm on the rocks of Scilly. His own ship was lost, and every person on board perished. Three more ships met with the same fate; while three or four others were saved with the utmost difficulty. In Germany, Marshal Villars the French general carried all before him, and was upon the point of restoring the elector of Bavaria. The only hopes of the people lay in the activity and conduct of the duke of Marlborough, who opened the campaign of 1707, about the middle of May; but even here they were disappointed. The duke declined an engagement; and after several marches and countermarches, both armies retired into winter quarters about the end of October. The French made vigorous preparations for the next campaign; and the duke returned to England to meet with a reception he did not all expect, and which, as far as appears, he did not deserve.

The most remarkable transaction, however, of this year, and indeed of this whole reign, was the union between the two kingdoms of Scotland and England. Though governed by one sovereign since the time of James I. of England, yet each nation continued to be ruled by its respective parliament; and often professed to pursue opposite interests to those of its neighbour. The union had often been unsuccessfully attempted before, and had indeed been the cause of the bloody wars in the time of Edward I. and III. of England. In all the former proposals on that head, both nations were supposed to remain free and independent; each kingdom having its own parliament, and subject only to such taxes and other commercial regulations as those parliaments should judge expedient for the benefit of their respective states. After the destruction of the Darien colony, in the manner already related, King William had endeavoured to allay the national ferment by refusing the affair of an union with as much assiduity as his warlike disposition would allow. The terms proposed were the same with those formerly held out, viz. a federal union, somewhat like that of the states of Holland. With this view the Scots were prevailed on to send 20 commissioners to London; who, with 23 on the part of England, met at Whitehall in the month of October 1702. Here they were honoured with a visit from the queen, in order to enliven their proceedings and stimulate them to a more speedy dispatch of business; but the treaty was entirely broken off at this time by the Scottish commissioners insisting, that the rights and privileges of their countrymen trading to Africa and the Indies should be preserved and maintained. It was, however, resumed in the year 1706, when the commissioners again met on the 16th of April, in the council-chamber of Whitehall. The Scottish commissioners still proposed a federal union; but the English were determined on an incorporation, which should not afterwards be dissolved by a Scottish parliament. Nothing but this, they said, could settle a perfect and lasting friendship betwixt the two nations. The commissioners from Scotland, however, still continued to refuse that article which subjected their country to the same customs, excises, and regulations of trade as England; but the queen being persuaded to pay two visits in person to the commissioners, exerted herself so vigorously, that a majority was at last gained over; and all the rest yielded, though with reluctance, excepting Lockhart of Carnwath, who could not by any means be persuaded either to sign or seal the treaty.

The articles being fully prepared on the 22d of July, they were presented next day to her majesty by the lord-keeper, in the name of the English commissioners; at the same time that a sealed copy of the instrument was likewise delivered by the lord chancellor of Scotland. They were most graciously received; and the same day the queen dictated an order of council, threatening with prosecution such as should be concerned in any discourse or libel, or in laying wagers with regard to the union. Notwithstanding all this harmony, however, the treaty was received with the utmost approbation in Scotland. The terms had been carefully concealed, so that nothing transpired till the whole was at once laid before parliament. The ferment was then so general, that all ranks of people, however divided in other respects, united against this detested treaty. The nobility and gentry were exasperated at the annihilation of parliament, and the consequent loss of their influence and credit. The body of the people cried out, that the independence of the nation was sacrificed to treachery and corruption. They insisted that the obligations laid on their members to stay so long at London, in their attendance on the British parliament, would drain the country of its money, impoverish the members themselves, and subject them to the temptation of being corrupted. Nor was the commercial part of the people better satisfied. The dissolution of the India Company, the taxes laid on the necessaries of life, the vast number of duties, customs, and restrictions, laid upon trade, were all of them matter of complaint. Before this time the trade of Scotland had been open to the Levant, the Baltic, France, Spain, Portugal, Holland, and the Dutch plantations; and it seemed difficult to conceive how the commerce of the country could be advanced by laying restrictions upon it to these places, especially as the compensation allowed, viz. the privilege of trading to the English plantations. plantations in America, must have been a very trifling advantage, when the amount of the whole exports to these places did not near equal the expense of defending them. The most violent disputes took place in the parliament. The lord Bellhaven made a most pathetic speech, enumerating the miseries that would attend this treaty; which drew tears from the audience, and to this day is reckoned prophetic by many of the Scotch nation. Almost every article of the treaty was the subject of a protest; addresses against it were presented to parliament by the convention of royal boroughs, the commissioners of the general assembly, the company trading to Africa and the Indies, as well as from shires, stewartries, boroughs, towns, and parishes, without distinction of Whig, Tory, Presbyterian, or Episcopal.

Nor was the resentment of the common people without doors less than that of the members within. A coalition was formed betwixt the Presbyterians and Cavaliers: and to such a height did the resentment of the people arrive, that they chose officers, formed themselves into regiments, provided horses and ammunition, burnt the articles of union, justified their conduct by a public declaration, and resolved to take the route to Edinburgh and dissolve the parliament.

In the mean time, the privy council issued a proclamation against riots, commanding all persons to retire from the streets whenever the drum should beat; ordering the guards to fire on those who should disobey this command, and indemnifying them from all prosecution for maiming or slaying the lieges. Even these precautions were insufficient. The duke of Queensberry, the chief promoter of the union, though guarded by double lines of horse and foot, was obliged to pass through the streets at full gallop, amidst the curses and imprecations of the people, who pelted his guards, and even wounded some of his friends who attended him in the coach. In opposition to all this fury, the duke of Queensberry and others attached to the union magnified the advantages that would accrue to the kingdom from the union; they took off the resentment of the clergy, by promoting an act to be inserted in the treaty by which the Presbyterian discipline was to be the only government of the church of Scotland, unalterable in all succeeding times, and a fundamental article of the union. Envoys were employed to disunite the Cameronians from the Cavaliers, by demonstrating the absurdity, sinfulness, and danger, of such a proceeding. The India Company was flattered with the prospect of being indemnified for the losses they had sustained, and individuals by sharing an equivalent. Their last manoeuvre was to bring over a party in the Scots parliament, nicknamed the Squadrone Volante, from their fluctuating between ministry and opposition, without attaching themselves to any party till the critical moment, which was either to cement both kingdoms by a firm union, or involve them in the calamities of war. By this unexpected stroke, the ministry obtained a decisive victory, and all opposition was vain. The articles of treaty were ratified by parliament, with some trifling variations, on the 25th of March 1707; when the duke of Queensberry finally dissolved that ancient assembly, and Scotland ceased to be a separate independent kingdom.

On the conclusion of the treaty, the queen informed both houses of the English parliament, that the treaty of union, with some additions and alterations, was ratified by an act of the parliament of Scotland: that she had ordered it to be laid before them, and hoped it would meet their approbation. She observed, that they had now an opportunity of putting the last hand to a happy union of the two kingdoms: and that she should look upon it as a particular happiness if this great work, so often attempted before without success, could be brought to perfection in her reign. Objections, however, were started by the Tory party; but they were at that time too weak to be heard with any attention. Sir John Parkington compared the new treaty to the marriage of a woman without her consent. It was an union carried on by corruption and bribery within doors, and by force and violence without. The promoters of it had basely betrayed their trust, by giving up their independent constitution: and he would leave it to the judgment of the house, whether or not men of such principles were fit to be admitted into their house of representatives. Lord Harverham, in the upper-house, said, the question was, Whether two nations, independent in their sovereignties, that had their distinct laws and interests, different forms of worship, church-government and order, should be united into one kingdom? He supposed it an union made up of so many incongruous ingredients, that should it ever take effect, it would require a standing power and force to keep them from falling asunder, and breaking in pieces every moment. Above a hundred Scotch peers, and as many commoners, he said, were excluded from fitting and voting in parliament, though they had as much right to sit there as any English peer had to sit and vote in the parliament of England. The union, he said, was contrary to the sense of the Scotch nation; the murmurs of the people had been so loud as to fill the whole kingdom, and had reached even the doors of parliament. That the government had issued a proclamation, pardoning all slaughter, bloodshed, and maiming, committed upon those who should be found in tumults; and from all these circumstances he concluded, that the people of Scotland were averse to an incorporating union, which, he supposed, would be a most dangerous expedient to both nations. All these arguments, however, were answered by those of the opposite party with such success, that the union was unalterably completed on the first of May 1707; and the island took the name of "The United Kingdom of Great Britain." The queen expressed the highest satisfaction when it received the royal assent, and said, "She did not doubt but it would be remembered and spoken of hereafter, to the honour of those who had been instrumental in bringing it to such a happy conclusion. She desired that her subjects of both kingdoms should from henceforward behave with all possible respect and kindness towards one another; that so it might appear to all the world they had hearts disposed to become one people." The first of May was appointed a day of public thanksgiving; and congratulatory addresses were sent up from all parts of England, excepting the university of Oxford. The Scots, however, were totally silent on the occasion.

In this treaty, it must be observed, that the commissioners on the part of England were not only able statesmen, Flatemen, but, for the most part, well skilled in trade, which gave them an evident advantage over those of Scotland, who consisted of lords and gentlemen who had no commercial knowledge. Hence they were overmatched by the former in the great objects which were to give the turn to national prosperity; though they were very careful to preserve all their heritable offices, superiorities, jurisdictions, and other privileges and trappings of the feudal aristocracy. Had the English commissioners made a liberal use of the advantages afforded them at this time, it would have been in their power greatly to have enriched themselves as well as the inhabitants of Scotland; "but instead of this (says Mr Knox), in negotiating with a ruined kingdom, they were influenced by the then narrow short-fighted principle of commercial monopoly; and the consequences were such as might, with a small degree of reflection, have been foreseen. Instead of a solid compact, affording, upon the whole, reciprocal advantages, and which it would have been the inclination as well as interest of both nations to preserve inviolate, the concessions on the part of Scotland, and the restrictions on their trade, were so quickly and severely felt, that about the fifth year after the ratification of the treaty, the fifteen peers who first represented Scotland in the upper-house, though most of them had been the supporters of administration in promoting the union, unanimously moved for its dissolution. The motion was followed by a violent debate, in which, however, the Scottish peers were at last overruled, and thenceforth the nation submitted reluctantly to its fate. The metropolis, having no manufactures, now beheld itself deprived of its only support by the translation of the parliament to London. The trading towns pined under the duties and restrictions on their commerce; the whole kingdom, after so many fatal disasters, seemed completely ruined beyond recovery, and all degrees of men sunk under the weight of these complicated misfortunes. The first fruits of the treaty in Scotland were a board of customs and another of excise, the appointment of commissioners, collectors, &c., with other necessary officers, who were immediately distributed over the several seaports and districts of the nation. In many parts they were roughly used, particularly the excise officers; and in the Orkneys, the officers were so frightened by the country people, that for some time the business was obliged to be postponed."

In 1708, there was a warm debate in the grand committee of the house of lords, occasioned by a bill passed by the commons for rendering the union of the two kingdoms more entire and complete, whereby it was enacted, that, "from the first of May 1708, there should be but one privy council in the kingdom of Britain."—Of this affair Mr Cunningham gives a particular account, and informs us that he himself had a hand in the affair, and that he had "from his youth borne a just hate to the privy council of Scotland." The arguments for the dissolution were its enormous stretches of power and acts of cruelty; that it could now be of no other use in Scotland than that the court might thereby govern every thing at pleasure, and procure such members of parliament as they thought proper; against which both Scots and English ought now carefully to guard themselves. On the other hand, it was argued, that the abuse of the power complained of was no argument for the entire dissolution of the council, though it was for a restriction and limitation of it; that it was necessary that a privy council should remain in Scotland, out of regard to the ancient customs of the country, and to restrain the rage of the people, which was then ready to break out beyond all bounds. The dissolution, however, was carried by 50 against 40; after which the nation being deprived of this last fragment of their ancient government, the opposers of the union raised the animosities of the people to a dangerous height; but the ferment abated after an ineffectual attempt in favour of the Pretender.

We must now return to the duke of Marlborough, who had gone over to Flanders, where he seemed resolved to push his good fortune. Peace had been offered more than once; treaties entered upon, and as often frustrated. After the battle of Ramillies, the king of France had employed the elector of Bavaria to write letters in his name to the duke of Marlborough, containing proposals for opening a congress. He offered to give up either Spain and its dominions, or the kingdoms of Naples and Sicily, to Charles of Austria, and to give a barrier to the Dutch in the Netherlands. But these terms were rejected. The two armies once more met in numbers nearly equal at Oudenarde (A). An engagement ensued, in which the French were defeated, and Lille (B) the strongest town in Flanders, Ghent, Bruges, and all the other towns in that country, soon after fell into the hands of the victors. The campaign ended with fixing a barrier to the Dutch provinces, and it now only remained to force a way into the provinces of the enemy.

The French king being now in a manner reduced to despair, again sued for peace; but the demands of the allies were so high, that he was obliged to reject them,

(A) In this engagement the electoral prince of Hanover, afterwards George II. of Britain, greatly distinguished himself, and gained the whole glory of the first attack. In the engagement his horse was killed under him, and Colonel Lutfelki close by his side. "On that day (says Cunningham) this excellent young prince discovered such courage as no man living ought to forget, and as all posterity will never surpass."

(B) At the siege of Lille, Cunningham relates the following anecdote of the magnanimity of a common soldier. "This man had the good fortune to take prisoner Major-general Colbert, brother to the marquis de Torcy. The prisoner, greatly taken with the clemency, humanity, and good behaviour of the soldier, offered him 200 louis d'or, and a captain's post for life, if he would give him his liberty. The soldier, however, resisted the temptation, alleging the dishonour that would attend such conduct; and asking him at the same time, how, when raised to the rank of a captain, he could look his general in the face for whom he had fought for so many years?—This instance of fidelity weighed so much with Prince Eugene and the duke of Marlborough, that the former made him a present, and the latter gave him a captain's commission." and prepare for another campaign. This was in the year 1709. The first attempt of the allies was on the city of Tournay, garrisoned by 12,000 men, and exceedingly strong both by nature and art. After a terrible siege of 21 days, the town capitulated; and a month afterwards the citadel, which was still stronger than the town. Next followed the bloody battle of Malplaquet†; where the allied army, consisting of 110,000 men, attacked the French consisting of 120,000, strongly posted, and fortified in such a manner that they seemed quite inaccessible. Nothing, however, was able to stand before the allied army; they drove the French from their fortifications: but their victory cost them dear; 20,000 of their best troops lay dead on the field of battle (c). The consequence of this victory was the surrender of the city of Mons, which ended the campaign.

The last campaign of the duke of Marlborough, which happened in the year 1711, is said to have excelled all his former exploits. He was opposed by the marshal Villars, the same who had commanded the French in the battle of Malplaquet. He contrived his measures so, that, by marching and countermarching, he induced the enemy to quit a strong line of intrenchments without striking a blow, which he came afterwards and took possession of. This enterprise was followed by the taking of Bouchain, which was the last military achievement of this great general. By a continuance of conduct and success almost unparalleled, he had gained to the allies a prodigious tract of country. From the beginning of the war, which had now continued nine years, he had perpetually advanced, and never retreated before his enemies, nor lost an advantage he had obtained over them. He most frequently gained the enemy's posts without fighting; but where he was obliged to attack, no fortifications were able to resist him. He had never besieged a city which he did not take, nor engaged in a battle in which he did not come off victorious. Thus the allies had reduced under their command Spanish Guelderland, Limbourg, Brabant, Flanders, and Hainault; they were masters of the Scarpe; the capture of Bouchain had opened for them a way into the heart of France, and another campaign might have made them masters of Paris; but on the duke's return from this campaign, he was accused of having taken a bribe of 600l. a-year from a Jew who had contracted to supply the army with bread; and the queen thought proper to dismiss him from all his employments.

On the removal of this great general, the command of the British forces was given to the duke of Ormond. The transactions which followed, as represented by Mr Cunningham, are by no means favourable to the character of the British nation. He represents the people at large as blinded by a headstrong and furious clergy, who wished to revive the absurdities of the Romish religion, and to unite the English and Gallican churches; the general of the army acting a most insidious part, by giving the enemy intelligence of the designs of the allies before he declared that he was not to act in concert with them; and the queen herself as commanding him to act such a shameful part, nay as acting in a similar manner herself. Prince Eugene complained much of the inactivity of the English general, though he seemed to be unacquainted with his treachery; while the whole army loaded him with execrations, calling him "a stupid tool, and a general of straw." All this, however, was in vain; the duke continued to prefer the commands of his sovereign to every other consideration.

The disgrace of the duke of Marlborough had been owing to the prevalence of the tory party, who had now got the whig ministry turned out; the consequence of this was, that in spite of all the remonstrances, memorials, &c. of the allies, the British army in Flanders was ordered not to act offensively. Hence the operations languished, a considerable body of the allies was cut off at Denain, and the French retook some towns. A peace was at last concluded in Peace with 1713 between France and Britain. In this treaty it was stipulated, that Philip, now acknowledged king of Spain, should renounce all right to the crown of France, the union of two such powerful kingdoms being thought dangerous to the liberties of Europe. It was agreed, that the duke of Berry, Philip's brother, and after him in succession, should also renounce his right to the crown of Spain, in case he became king of France. It was stipulated, that the duke of Savoy should possess the island of Sicily with the title of king; together with Fenefrelles, and other places on the continent; which increase of dominion was in some measure made out of the spoils of the French monarchy. The Dutch had the barrier granted them which they so much desired; and if the crown of France was deprived of some dominions to enrich the duke of Savoy, on the other hand the house of Austria was taxed to supply the wants of the Hollanders, who were put in possession of the strongest towns in Flanders. The fortifications of Dunkirk were demolished. Spain gave up Gibraltar and the island of Minorca. France resigned her pretensions to Hudson's bay, Nova Scotia, and Newfoundland; but was left in possession of Cape Breton, and the liberty of drying fish upon the shore. Among the articles glorious to the British nation, their fettering free the French Protestants confined in the prisons and galleys for their religion, was not the least meritorious. For the emperor it was stipulated, that he should possess the kingdom of Naples, the duchy of Milan, and the Spanish Netherlands. The king of Prussia was to have Upper Guelder; and a time was fixed for the emperor's acceding to these articles, as he had for some time obstinately refused to assist at the negotiation. This famous treaty was signed at Utrecht on the last day of March 1713.

This year was also remarkable for an attempt of the Scottish peers and commons to dissolve the union, which, as has been observed, had proved exceedingly disagreeable and distressful to the nation. During the debates

(c) Cunningham differs prodigiously from this account. His computation being no more than 6000 killed and 9000 wounded on the part of the allies, and 7000 killed and 10,000 wounded on the part of the French. Britain debates on this subject, the earl of Peterborough endeavoured to prove the impossibility of dissolving the treaty, which he compared to a marriage, that, being once contracted, could not be dissolved by any power on earth. He observed, that though England, who, in the national marriage, must be supposed to represent the husband, had in some instances been unkind to the lady, she ought not presently to sue for a divorce; and added, when the union was termed a mere political expedient, that it could not have been made more solemn, unless, like the ten commandments, it had come from heaven. The duke of Argyle, also, who had originally promoted the union, now declared against it, and said, that unless it were dissolved, he did not long expect to have either property left in Scotland or liberty in England. By some other peers it was alleged, that the union had not produced its intended effect; that it had been designed to promote friendship between the two nations; but, so far from answering the purpose, the animosities between them were never so great as then; and if they were separated again, they would be better friends. This motion was overruled in the house; but the discontent of the people still continued, and addresses were prepared throughout the kingdom, and matters were in danger of coming to the worst extremities, when the attempt of the Pretender in 1715 divided the minds of the people, that no unanimous effort could ever afterwards be made; though the union was long generally considered, and still is by some individuals, as a national grievance.

The history of the latter part of this reign consists entirely of the intrigues of the Whigs and Tories against each other; which, as they are now of no importance, it is needless to take up time in relating, further than that the Tory influence continued to prevail. Whether the ministry at this time wished to alter the succession from the Hanoverian line, cannot now be easily made out; but certain it is, that the Whigs firmly believed it, and the Tories but faintly denied the charge. The suspicions of the former became every day stronger, particularly when they saw a total removal of the Whigs from all places of trust and confidence throughout the kingdom, and their employments bestowed on professed Tories, supposed to be maintainers of an unbroken hereditary succession.

The violent dissensions between these two parties, their unbounded licentiousness, cabals, and tumults, made the queen's situation very disagreeable; her health declined; and on the 28th of July 1714, she fell into a lethargic insensibility. Notwithstanding all the medicines the physicians could prescribe, the distemper gained ground so fast, that next day they despaired of her life. All the members of the privy-council without distinction were now summoned from the different parts of the kingdom; and they began to provide for the security of the constitution. A letter was sent to the elector of Hanover, informing him of the queen's desperate situation, and desiring him to repair to Holland, where he would be attended by a British squadron to convey him to England. At the same time they dispatched instructions to the earl of Strafford at the Hague, to desire the States-general to be ready to perform the guaranty of the Protestant succession. Precautions were taken to secure the sea-ports; and the command of the fleet was bestowed upon the earl of Berkeley, a professed Whig. These measures, which were all dictated by that party, answered a double end. They argued the alacrity of the Whigs in the cause of their new sovereign, and seemed to imply that the state was in danger from the disaffection of the opposite party.

On the 30th of July the queen seemed to be somewhat relieved by the medicines which had been given her. She rose from her bed about eight in the morning and walked a little. After some time, casting her eyes on a clock that stood in her chamber, she continued to gaze at it for some minutes. One of the ladies in waiting asked her what she saw there more than usual? to which the queen only answered by turning her eyes upon her with a dying look. She was soon after seized with an apoplectic fit; from which, however, she was somewhat recovered by the assistance of Dr Mead. She continued all night in a state of stupification. She gave some signs of life betwixt twelve and one the next day; but expired the following morning, a little after seven o'clock, having lived 49 years, and reigned upwards of 12. This princess was remarkable neither for her learning nor her capacity. Like all the rest of her family, she seemed rather fitted for the duties of private life than a public station; being a pattern of conjugal fidelity, a good mother, a warm friend, and an indulgent mistress; and to her honour it certainly must be recorded, that during her reign none suffered on the scaffold for treason. In her ended the line of the Stuarts, a family who never rewarded their friends, nor ever avenged them of their adversaries; a family whose misfortunes and misfortunes are not to be paralleled in history.

The queen had no sooner resigned her breath than she was received by the duke of Northumberland, captain of the lifeguard, and the lords of the regency. From the landing-place he walked to his house in the park, accompanied by a great number of the nobility and other persons of distinction, who expected to make their court in this reign in consequence of their turbulence and opposition to the reigning party in the last. George I. was 54 years old when he ascended the British throne. His mature age, his sagacity and experience, his numerous alliances, and the general tranquillity of Europe, all contributed to establish his interests, and promise him a peaceable and happy reign. His virtues, though... Britain, though not shining, were solid; and he was of a very different disposition from the Stuart family whom he succeeded. These were known to a proverb for leaving their friends in extremity; George, on the contrary, soon after his arrival in England, was heard to say, "My maxim is, never to abandon my friends, to do justice to all the world, and to fear no man." To these qualities of resolution and perseverance, he joined great application to business. One fault, however, with regard to England, remained behind: he studied the interests of the kingdom he had left, more than of those he came to govern.

The new king soon discovered his inclination to support those who had raised him to the throne, that is, the Whig party. When he retired to his bed-chamber, after his first landing, he sent for such of the nobility as had distinguished themselves by their zeal for his succession. He expressed the greatest regard for the duke of Marlborough, just then arrived from the continent, whither he had been driven by the violence of the Tories. The same friendship he professed for the other leaders of the Whigs; but the Tories found themselves excluded from the royal favour. The king did not seem sensible that the monarch of a faction rules but one half of his subjects. It was his misfortune, and consequently that of the nation, that he was hemmed round by men who soured him with all their own interests and prejudices. The Whigs, while they pretended to secure the crown for the king, were using all their arts to confirm their own interests, extend their connections, and give laws to their sovereign. An instantaneous change was made in all the offices of trust, honour, or advantage. The names of the contending parties were changed into those of Hanoverians and Jacobites. The former governed the senate and court, oppressing whom they would, bound the lower orders of people by severe laws, and kept them at a distance by vile distinctions; and then taught them to call this liberty.

In consequence of these partialities, the highest discontented were raised through the whole kingdom. The Tories or Jacobites raised the most terrible outrages; and had the Pretender been a man of any judgment or abilities, a fair opportunity was now offered him of striking a decisive blow. Instead of this, he continued a calm spectator on the continent, and only sent over his emissaries to disperse ineffectual manifestoes and delude the unwary. In these papers he observed, that the late queen had intentions of calling him to the crown. He expostulated with his people upon the injustice they had done themselves in proclaiming a foreign prince for their sovereign, contrary to the laws of the country, that gave him alone the real claim. Copies of a printed address were sent to the dukes of Shrewsbury, Marlborough, Argyle, and other noblemen of the first distinction; vindicating his right to the crown, and complaining of the injustice of his people. Yet, though he still complained of their conduct, he never took any step to correct his own, or remove that obstacle by which his father had lost his throne. He still continued to profess the truest regard to the Catholic religion; and, instead of concealing his sentiments on that head, gloried in his principles.

But, however much the Popish religion was at that time hated in England, the principles of the dissenters were not in the least more agreeable to the generality. The Tories affirmed, that, under a Whig administration, heresy and impiety were daily gaining ground. The lower orders of the clergy joined in these complaints, and pointed out several tracts published in favour of Arianism and Socinianism. The ministry not only refused to punish the delinquents, but silenced the clergy themselves, and forbade their future disputations on these topics.—The parliament was now dissolved, and another called by a very extraordinary proclamation. In this the king complained of the evil designs of men disaffected to his succession; and of their having misrepresented his conduct and principles. He expressed his hopes, that his subjects would send up to parliament the fittest persons to redress the present disorders. He intreated that they would elect such in particular, as had expressed a firm attachment to the Protestant succession when it was in danger. In the election of this important parliament, uncommon vigour was exerted on both sides; but by dint of the moneyed interest that prevailed in corporations, and the activity of the ministry, a great majority of Whigs was returned both in England and Scotland.

Upon the first meeting of this new parliament, the violent most violent measures were resolved upon against the proceedings of the late ministry. Part of them kept away from business, of the new parliament. A committee was appointed to inspect all the papers relative to the late treaty, and to pick out such of them as might serve for grounds of accusation against the late ministry. The earl of Oxford was impeached of high treason, and sent to the Tower. The violence of the commons was answered with equal violence without doors. Tumults became every day more frequent, and every tumult served only to increase the severity of the legislature. They now passed an act, declaring, that if any persons to the number of 12, unlawfully assembled, should continue together one hour after being required to disperse by a justice of peace or other officer, and after hearing the act against riots read in public, they should be deemed guilty of felony without benefit of clergy. This is a very severe act, and one of the greatest restrictions on the liberty of the subject that has passed during this century; as, by it, all meetings of the people, either for the purposes of amusement or redress, are rendered criminal, if it shall please any magistrate to consider them as such.

These vindictive proceedings excited the indignation of the people, who perceived that the avenues of royal favour were closed to all but a faction. A rebellion commenced in Scotland, where to their other grievances they joined that of the union, which they were taught to consider as an oppression. The malecontents of this country had all along maintained a correspondence with their friends in England, who were now driven by resentment and apprehension into a system of politics they would not otherwise have dreamed of. Some of the Tory party, who were men attached to the Protestant religion, and of moderate principles in government, began to associate with the Jacobites, and to wish in earnest for a revolution. Scotland first showed them the example. The earl of Mar, assembling 300 of his vassals in the Highlands, proclaimed the Pretender at Castleton; and setting up his standard at Braemar, assumed the title of lieutenant general of his majesty's forces. To second these attempts, two vessels arrived from Britain, from France, with arms, ammunition, and a number of officers, together with assurances to the earl, that the pretender himself would shortly come over to head his own forces. In consequence of this promise, the earl soon found himself at the head of 10,000 men well armed and provided. He secured the pass of Tay at Perth, where his head-quarters were established; and made himself master of the whole province of Fife, and all the sea-coast on that side of the firth of Forth. He marched from thence to Dumblain, as if he had intended to cross the Forth at Stirling-bridge; but there he was informed that the duke of Argyle, who on this occasion was appointed commander in chief of all the forces in North Britain, was advancing against him from Stirling with all his own clans, assisted by some troops from Ireland. Upon this he thought proper at first to retreat; but being soon after joined by some of the clans under the earl of Seaforth, and others under General Gordon, an experienced officer, who had signalized himself in the Russian service, he resolved to face the enemy, and directed his march towards the south.

The duke of Argyle, apprized of his intentions, and at any rate willing to prove his attachment to the present government, resolved to give him battle in the neighbourhood of Dumblain, though his forces did not amount to half the number of the enemy. In the morning, therefore, he drew up his army, which did not exceed 3,500 men, in order of battle; but he soon found himself greatly outflanked by the insurgents. The duke, therefore, perceiving the earl make attempts to surround him, was obliged to alter his disposition, which, on account of the scarcity of general officers, was not done so expeditiously as to be finished before the rebels began the attack. The left wing of the duke's army received the centre of the enemy, and supported the first charge without shrinking. It seemed even for a while victorious, and the earl of Clanranald was killed. But Glengary, who was second in command, undertook to inspire his intimidated forces with courage; and, waving his bonnet, cried out several times, "Revenge! This animated the rebel troops to such a degree, that they followed him close to the points of the enemies' bayonets, and got within their guard. A total rout began to ensue of that wing of the royal army; and General Witham, their commander, flying full speed to Stirling, gave out that the rebels were completely victorious. In the mean time, the duke of Argyle, who commanded in person on the right, attacked the left of the enemy; and drove them before him two miles, though they often faced about and attempted to rally. Having thus entirely broken that wing, and driven them over the river Allan, he returned back to the field of battle; where, to his great mortification, he found the enemy victorious, and patiently waiting for the assault. However, instead of renewing the engagement, both armies continued to gaze at each other, neither caring to begin the attack. In the evening, both parties drew off, and both claimed the victory. All the advantages of a victory, however, belonged to Argyle. He had interrupted the progress of the enemy; and, in their circumstances, delay was defeat. In fact, the earl of Mar soon found his losses and disappointments increase. The castle of Inverness, of which he was in possession, was delivered up by Lord Lovat, who had hitherto professed to act in the interest of the Pretender. The marquis of Tullibardine forsook the earl, in order to defend his own part of the country; and many of the clans, seeing no likelihood of coming to a second engagement, returned quietly home.

In the mean time the rebellion was still more unsuccessfully prosecuted in England. From the time the duke of Pretender had undertaken this wild project at Paris, in James's which the duke of Ormond and Lord Bolingbroke were party engaged, Lord Stair, the English ambassador there, had penetrated all his designs, and sent faithful accounts of all his measures and of all his adherents to the ministry at home. Upon the first rumour, therefore, of an insurrection, they imprisoned several lords and gentlemen, of whom they had a suspicion. But these precautions were not able to stop the insurrection in the western counties, where it was already begun. All their preparations, however, were weak and ill conducted; every measure was betrayed to government as soon as projected, and many revolts were repressed in the very outset. The university of Oxford was treated with great severity on this occasion. Major-general Pepper, with a strong detachment of dragoons, took possession of the city at day-break, declaring that he would instantly shoot any of the students who should presume to appear without the limits of their respective colleges.

The insurrection in the northern counties came to greater maturity. In the month of October 1715, of the earl of Derwentwater, and Mr Forster, took the of Derfield with a body of horse, and, being joined by some gentlemen from the borders of Scotland, proclaimed the Pretender. Their first attempt was to seize upon Newcastle, in which they had many friends; but finding the gates shut against them, they retired to Hexham. To oppose these, General Carpenter was detached by government with a body of 900 men, and an engagement was hourly expected. The rebels had two methods by which they might have conducted themselves with prudence and safety. The one was to march directly into the western parts of Scotland, and there join General Gordon, who commanded a strong body of Highlanders. The other was to cross the Tweed, and boldly attack General Carpenter, whose forces did not exceed their own. From the infatuation attendant on the measures of that party, neither of these courses was pursued. They took the route to Jedburgh, where they hoped to leave Carpenter on one side, and penetrate into England by the western border. This was the effectual means to cut themselves off either from retreat or assistance. A party of Highlanders, who had joined them by this time, at first refused to accompany them in such a desperate incursion, and one half of them actually returned to their own country. At Brampton, Mr Forster opened his commission of general, which had been sent him by the earl of Mar, and there he proclaimed the Pretender. They continued their march to Penrith, where the body of the militia that was assembled to oppose them fled at their appearance. From Penrith, they proceeded by the way of Kendal and Lancaster to Preston, of which place they took possession without any resistance. But this was the last stage of their ill-advised excursion; for General Wills, at the head of 7000 men, came up to attack them; and from his activity there was no escaping. They now, therefore, began to raise barricades about the town, and to put the place in a posture of defence, repelling the first attacks of the royal army with success. Next day, however, Wills was reinforced by Carpenter, and the town was invested on all sides. In this deplorable situation, to which they were reduced by their own rashness, Forster hoped to capitulate with the general; and accordingly sent Colonel Oxburgh, who had been taken prisoner, with a trumpeter to propose a capitulation. This, however, Wills refused; alleging that he would not treat with rebels, and that the only favour they had to expect was to be spared from immediate slaughter. These were hard terms, but no better could be obtained. They accordingly laid down their arms, and were put under a strong guard. All the noblemen and leaders were secured, and a few of their officers tried for deserting from the royal army, and shot by order of a court-martial. The common men were imprisoned at Chester and Liverpool: the noblemen and considerable officers were sent to London, and led through the streets pinioned and bound together, to intimidate their party.

Though the schemes of the Pretender appear to have been foolishly enough conducted in Britain, yet they were much more so in France. Bolingbroke had been made his secretary at Paris, and Ormond his prime minister. But these statesmen quickly found that nothing could be done in favour of his cause. The king of France, who had ever espoused the interest of the abdicated family, was just dead; and the duke of Orleans, who succeeded in the government of the kingdom, was adverse to lending the Pretender any assistance. His party, however, which was composed of the lowest and the most ignorant exiles from the British dominions, affected the utmost confidence, and boasted of a certainty of success. The deepest secrets of his cabinet, and all his intended measures, were bandied about in coffee-houses by persons of the lowest rank both in fortune and abilities. Subaltern officers resolved to be his generals; and even prostitutes were entrusted to manage his negotiations. Little therefore could be expected from such assistance and such councils.

Though, by this time, the Pretender might easily have seen that his affairs were desperate; yet, with his usual infatuation, he resolved to hazard his person among his friends in Scotland, at a time when such a measure was too late for success. Paffing, therefore, through France in disguise, and embarking in a small vessel at Dunkirk, he arrived, after a voyage of a few days, on the coast of Scotland, with only six gentlemen in his train. He paffed unknown through Aberdeen to Fetteresso, where he was met by the earl of Mar, and about 30 noblemen and gentlemen of the first quality. There he was solemnly proclaimed; and his declaration, dated at Comeroy, was printed and dispersed. He went from thence to Dundee, where he made a public entry; and in two days more he arrived at Scoon, where he intended to have the ceremony of his coronation performed. He ordered thanksgivings to be made for his safe arrival; he enjoined the ministers to pray for him in their churches; and without the smallest share of power, went through the ceremonies of royalty, which threw an air of ridicule on all his conduct. Having thus spent some time in unimportant parade, he resolved to abandon the enterprise with the same levity with which it was undertaken. Having made a speech to his grand council, he informed them of his want of money, arms, and ammunition, for undertaking a campaign, and therefore deplored that he was obliged to leave them. He once and again embarked on board a small French ship that lay leaves in the harbour of Montrose, accompanied with several lords, his adherents; and in five days arrived at Graveline.

General Gordon, who was left commander in chief of the forces, with the assistance of Earl Marechal, proceeded at their head to Aberdeen, where he secured three vessels to sail northward, which took on board such persons as intended to make their escape to the continent. He then continued his march through the Highlands, and quietly dismissed his forces as he went forward. This retreat was made with such expedition, that the duke of Argyle, with all his activity, could never overtake his rear, which consisted of 1000 horse.

The rebellion being ended, the law was put in force with all its terrors; and the prisons of London were crowded with those deluded persons, whom the ministry seemed resolved not to pardon. The commons, in their address to the crown, declared they would prosecute, in the most rigorous manner, the authors of the late rebellion; and their measures were as vindictive as their resolutions were speedy. The earls of Derwentwater, Nithsdale, Carnwath, and Wintown, the lords Widrinton, Kenmuir, and Nairne, were impeached; and, upon pleading guilty, all but Lord Wintown, received sentence of death. No intercessions could prevail on the ministry to spare these unhappy men. The house of lords even presented an address to the throne for mercy, but without effect; the king only answered, that on this, as on all other occasions, he would act as he thought most consistent with the dignity of the crown and the safety of the people. Orders were accordingly dispatched for executing the lords Derwentwater, Nithsdale, and Kenmuir, immediately; the rest were respited to a farther time. Nithsdale, however, had the good fortune to escape in woman's clothes that were brought him by his mother the night before his execution. Derwentwater and Kenmuir were brought to the scaffold on Tower-hill at the time appointed. Both underwent their sentence with calm intrepidity, and seemingly less moved than those who beheld them.

An act of parliament was next made for trying the private persons in London, and not in Lancashire where they were taken in arms. This was considered, by some of the best lawyers, as an alteration of the ancient constitution of the kingdom, by which it was supposed that every prisoner should be tried in the place where the offence was committed, as a jury of neighbours would be best qualified to enter into the nature of the offence. In the beginning of April, commissioners for trying the rebels met in the court of common pleas, when the bills were found against Mr Forster, Mr Macintosh, and 20 of their confederates. Forster escaped from Newgate, and reached the continent in safety; the rest pleaded not guilty. the keeper of Newgate, being suspected of having connived at Forster's escape, was tried for his life, but acquitted. After this, Macintosh, and several other prisoners, broke from Newgate, after having mastered the keeper and turnkey, and disarmed the centinel. The court proceeded to the trial of those that remained; four or five were hanged, drawn, and quartered, at Tyburn. The judges appointed to try the rebels at Liverpool found a considerable number of them guilty of high treason. Two-and-twenty were executed at Manchester and Preston; about 1000 experienced the king's mercy, if such it may be called, to be transported to North America.

The rebellion being thus extinguished, the danger of the state was made a pretence for continuing the parliament beyond the term fixed for its dissolution. An act, therefore, was made by their own authority, repealing that by which they were to be dissolved every third year, and the term of their duration was extended to seven years. This attempt in any delegated body of people to increase their own power by extending it, is contrary to the first principles of justice. If it was right to extend their duration to seven years, they might also perpetuate their authority; and thus cut off even the shadow of a nomination. The bill, however, passed both houses, and all objections to it were considered as disaffection. The people might murmur at this encroachment, but it was too late for redress.

Domestic concerns being thus adjusted, the king resolved upon a voyage to the continent. He foreflew a highly provoked against him for having entered into a confederacy with the Russians and Danes during his absence at Bender, and for having purchased from the king of Denmark the towns of Bremen and Verden, which constituted a part of his dominions. In consequence of this, Charles maintained a close correspondence with the dissatisfied subjects of Great Britain; and a scheme was formed for landing a considerable body of Swedish forces, with the king at their head, in some part of the island, where it was expected they would be joined by all the malecontents in the kingdom. Count Gyllenburg, the Swedish minister in London, was peculiarly active in the conspiracy; but being seized with all his papers, by order of the king, the confederacy was broke for that time. A bill, however, was passed by the commons, forbidding all commerce with Sweden; the trade with which country was at that time of the utmost consequence to the English merchants. George having passed through Holland to Hanover, in order to secure his German dominions, entered into a new treaty with the Dutch and the regent of France, by which they agreed mutually to assist each other in case of an invasion; and for his further security, the commons granted him 250,000l. But the death of the Swedish monarch, who was soon after killed at the siege of Frederichshall in Norway, put an end to all disquietude from that quarter.

Among the many treaties for which this reign was remarkable, one had been concluded, which was called the quadruple alliance. It was agreed between the emperor, France, Holland, and Britain, that the emperor should renounce all pretensions to the crown of Spain, and exchange Sardinia for Sicily with the duke of Savoy; that the succession to the duchies of Tuscany, Parma, and Placentia, should be settled on the queen of Spain's eldest son, in case the present possessors should die without male issue. This treaty, however, was by no means agreeable to the king of Spain; and consequently it became prejudicial to the English, as it interrupted the commerce with that kingdom. A war with Spain soon after commenced between Spain and the emperor, who was considered as the principal contriver of the treaty; and a numerous body of Spanish forces were sent into Italy to support Philip's pretensions in that quarter. The regent of France attempted in vain to diffuse him, and the king of Britain offered his mediation with the like bad success; their intervention was considered as partial and unjust. A Spanish war was then resolved on. A squadron of 22 ships was equipped with all expedition, the command of which was given to Sir George Byng, and ordered to fail for Naples, at that time threatened with a Spanish army. He was received with the greatest joy by the Neapolitans; who informed him that the Spaniards, to the amount of 30,000, were then actually landed in Sicily. In this exigence, as no assistance could be given by land, he resolved to fail thither, fully determined to pursue the Spanish fleet on which the army was embarked. Upon coming round Cape Faro, he perceived two small Spanish vessels; and pursuing them closely, they led him to their main fleet, which, before noon, he discovered in line of battle, amounting in all to 27 sail. The Spaniards, however, notwithstanding their superiority in number, attempted to fail away; but finding it impossible to make their escape, they kept up a running fight, and the commanders behaved with great courage and activity; in spite of which they were all taken except three, which were preferred by the conduct of one Cummoc, their vice-admiral, a native of Ireland. Sir George Byng behaved on this occasion with great prudence and resolution; and the king wrote him a letter with his own hand, approving his conduct.

The rupture with Spain was thought to be favourable to the interests of the Pretender; and it was hoped that the assistance of Cardinal Alberoni, the Spanish minister, a new insurrection might be excited in England. The duke of Ormonde was the person fixed upon to conduct this expedition; and he obtained from the Spanish court a fleet of ten ships of war and transports, having on board 6000 regular troops, with arms for 12,000 more. But fortune was still as unfavourable as ever. Having set sail, and proceeded as far as Cape Finifterre, he was encountered by a violent storm, which disabled his fleet and frustrated the expedition. This misfortune, together with the bad success of the Spanish arms in Sicily and other parts of Europe, induced Philip to wish for a cessation of arms; and he at last consented to sign the quadruple alliance, by which means peace was again restored to Europe.

Tranquillity being thus established, the ministry proceeded to secure the dependency of the Irish parliament made dependent on that of England. One Maurice Annefley had appealed to the house of peers of England from a decree made by the Irish peers, and their decree was reversed. The British peers ordered the barons of exchequer in Ireland to put Mr Annefley in possession of the lands he had lost by the decree of the lords in that kingdom. The barons obeyed this order; and the Irish peers fed a vote against them, as having attempted to diminish the just privileges of the parliament of Ireland; and at the same time ordered the barons to be taken under the custody of the black rod. On the other hand, the house of lords in England resolved, that the barons of the exchequer in Ireland had acted with courage and fidelity; and addressed the king to signify his approbation of their conduct, by some marks of his favour. To complete their intention, a bill was prepared, by which the Irish house of lords was deprived of all right of final jurisdiction. This bill was opposed in both houses, but particularly by the commons. It was there asserted by Mr Pitt, that it would only increase the power of the English peers, who were already too formidable. Mr Hungerford demonstrated, that the Irish lords had always exerted their power of finally deciding causes. Notwithstanding all opposition, the bill was carried by a great majority, and soon after received the royal assent.

This blow was severely felt by the Irish; but was by no means so great as that which the English about this time felt from the South-sea scheme, which commenced in the year 1721. To explain this as concisely as possible, it must be observed, that ever since the revolution under King William, the government not having sufficient supplies granted by parliament, or what was granted requiring time to be collected, they were obliged to borrow money from several different companies of merchants; and among the rest from that company which traded to the South-sea. In the year 1716, the government was indebted to this company about nine millions and a half of money; for which they granted at the rate of 6 per cent. interest. As this company was not the only one to which government was indebted, Sir Robert Walpole formed a design of lessening the national debt, giving the several companies an alternative either of accepting a lower interest, namely 5 per cent, or of being paid the principal. The different companies chose rather to accept of the diminished interest than to be paid the principal. The South-sea Company, in particular, having augmented their loan to ten millions, were contented to receive 500,000l. annually as interest, instead of 600,000l., which they usually received. In the same manner, the governors and company of the bank, and other companies, were contented to receive a diminished annual interest for their respective loans; all which greatly lessened the debts of the nation.

In this situation of things, one Blount, a scrivener, proposed to the ministry, in the name of the South-sea Company, to buy up all the debts of the different companies, and thus for the South-sea Company to become the sole creditors of the state. The terms he offered to government were extremely advantageous. The South-sea Company was to redeem the debts of the nation out of the hands of the private proprietors who were creditors to the government, upon whatever terms they could agree on; and for the interest of this money which they had thus redeemed and taken into their own hands, they would be contented to be allowed by government 5 per cent. for five years; after which the interest should be reduced to 4 per cent, and should at any time be redeemable by parliament. For these purposes a bill passed both houses. But now came the part of the scheme big with fraud and ruin. As the directors of the South-sea Company could not of themselves be supposed to possess so much money as was sufficient to buy up the debts of the nation, they were empowered to raise it by opening a subscription to an imaginary scheme for trading in the South seas; from which commerce immense advantages were promised, and still greater expected by the rapacious credulity of the people. All the creditors of government, therefore, were invited to come in, and exchange their securities, viz. the security of government, for that of the South-sea Company. The directors' books were no sooner opened for the first subscription, than crowds came to make the exchange of government stock for South-sea stock. The delusion was artfully continued and spread. Subscriptions in a few days sold for double the price they had been bought at. The scheme succeeded beyond even the projector's hopes, and the whole nation was infected with a spirit of avaricious enterprise. The infatuation prevailed; the stock increased to a surprising degree, even to near ten times the value of what it was first bought for.

After a few months, however, the people waked from their dreams of riches; and found that all the advantages they expected were merely imaginary, while thousands of families were involved in one common ruin. Many of the directors, by whose arts the people were taught to expect such great benefits from a traffic purchased to the South seas, had amassed considerable fortunes by the credulity of the public. It was some consolation, however, to the people, to find the parliament sharing in the general indignation, and resolving to strip those unjust plunderers of their possessions. Orders were first given to remove all the directors of the South-sea Company from their seats in parliament, and the places they possessed under government. The principal delinquents were punished by a forfeiture of all such possessions and estates as they had acquired during the continuance of this popular frenzy. The next care was to redress the sufferers. Several just and useful resolutions were taken by parliament, and a bill was speedily prepared for repairing the late sufferings as far as the inspection of the legislature could extend. Of the profit arising from the South-sea scheme, the sum of seven millions was given back to the original proprietors; several additions were also made to their dividends out of what was possessed by the company in their own right; and the remaining capital stock was also divided among the old proprietors at the rate of 33 per cent.—In the mean time, petitions from all parts of the kingdom were presented to the house, demanding justice; and the whole nation seemed exasperated to the highest degree. Public credit sustained a terrible shock. Some principal members of the ministry were deeply concerned in these fraudulent transactions. The bank was drawn upon faster than it could supply; and nothing was heard but the ravings of disappointment, and the cries of despair.

By degrees, however, the effects of this terrible calamity wore off, and matters returned to their former state of tranquillity. A new war with Spain commenced. Admiral Hoffer was sent to South America to intercept the Spanish galleons; but the Spaniards being apprised of his design, relented their treasure. The greatest part of the British fleet sent on that expedition was rendered entirely unfit for service. The seamen were cut off in great numbers by the malignity of the climate. mate and the length of the voyage, while the admiral himself is said to have died of a broken heart. In order to retaliate these hostilities, the Spaniards undertook the siege of Gibraltar; but with as little success on their side. In this dispute France offered her mediation; and such a reconciliation as treaties could procure was the consequence: a temporary peace ensued; both sides only watching an opportunity to renew hostilities with advantage.

Soon after the breaking up of the parliament in the year 1727, the king resolved to visit his electoral dominions of Hanover. Having appointed a regency in his absence, he embarked for Holland, and lay, upon his landing, at a little town called Voez. Next day he proceeded on his journey; and in two days more, between ten and eleven at night, arrived at Delden, to all appearance in perfect health. He supped there very heartily, and continued his journey early the next morning; but between eight and nine ordered his coach to stop. It being perceived that one of his hands lay motionless, Monsieur Fabrice, who had formerly been servant to the king of Sweden, and who now attended King George, attempted to quicken the circulation, by chafing it between his own. As this had no effect, the surgeon who followed on horseback was called, and he rubbed it with spirits. Soon after, the king's tongue began to swell, and he had just strength enough to bid them haffen to Osnaburgh. Then, falling insensible into Fabrice's arms, he never recovered; but expired about 11 o'clock the next morning, in the 68th year of his age, and 13th of his reign. His body was conveyed to Hanover, and interred among his ancestors.

On the accession of George II, the two great parties into which the nation had been so long divided, again changed their names, and were now called the court and country parties. Throughout the greatest part of this reign, there seem to have been two objects of controversy, which rose up in debate at every session, and tried the strength of the opponents; these were the national debt, and the number of forces to be kept in pay. The government on the present king's accession owed more than 30,000,000 of money; and though there was a long continuance of profound peace, yet this sum was found constantly increasing. It was much wondered at by the country party how this could happen, and it was as constantly the business of the court to give plausible reasons for the increase. Thus, demands for new supplies were made every session of parliament, either for the purposes of securing friends upon the continent, of guarding the kingdom from internal conspiracies, or of enabling the ministry to act vigorously in conjunction with the powers in alliance abroad. It was vainly alleged that those expenses were incurred without prudence or necessity; and that the increase of the national debt, by multiplying and increasing taxes, would at last become an intolerable burden to the poor. These arguments were offered, canvassed, and rejected; the court party was constantly victorious, and every demand was granted with cheerfulness and profusion.

The next thing worthy of notice in the reign of George II, is the charitable corporation. A society of men had united themselves into a company by this name; and their professed intention was to lend money at legal interest to the poor upon small pledges, and to persons of higher rank upon proper security. Their capital was at first limited to 30,000l., but they afterwards increased it to 600,000l. This money was supplied by subscription, and the care of conducting the capital was intrusted to a proper number of directors. This company having continued for more than 20 years, the cashier, George Robinson, member for Marlborough, and the warehouse-keeper, John Thompson, disappeared in one day. Five hundred thousand pounds of capital were found to be sunk or embezzled by means which the proprietors could not discover. They therefore, in a petition, represented to the house the manner in which they had been defrauded, and the distresses to which many of the petitioners were reduced. A secret committee being appointed to examine into this grievance, a most iniquitous scene of fraud was soon discovered, which had been carried on by Thompson and Robinson, in concert with some of the directors, for embezzling the capital and cheating the proprietors. Many persons of rank and quality were concerned in this infamous conspiracy; and even some of the first characters in the nation did not escape censure. No less than five members of parliament were expelled for the most forlorn acts of knavery. Sir Robert Sutton, Sir Archibald Grant, and George Robinson, for their frauds in the management of the charitable corporation scheme; Dennis Bond, and Sergeant Burch, for a fraudulent sale of the late unfortunate earl of Derwentwater's estate; and lastly John Ward, of Hackney, for forgery. It was at this time asserted in the house of lords, that not one shilling of the forfeited estates was ever applied to the service of the public, but became the reward of fraudulence and venality.

This happened in the year 1731; and in 1732, a Excise scheme was formed by Sir Robert Walpole of fixing a scheme re-general excise. He introduced it by recounting the rejected frauds practised by the factors in London that were employed in selling the American tobacco. To prevent these frauds, he proposed, that instead of having the customs levied in the usual manner upon tobacco, all hereafter to be imported should be lodged in warehouses appointed for that purpose by the officers of the crown; and should from thence be sold, upon paying the duty of 4d. per pound, when the proprietor found a purchaser. This proposal raised a violent ferment, both within doors and without. At last, the fury of the people was worked up to such a pitch, that the parliament-house was surrounded by multitudes, who intimidated the ministry, and compelled them to drop the design. The miscarriage of the bill was celebrated with public rejoicings in London and Westminster, and the minister was burned in effigy by the populace at London.

On this occasion an attempt was made to repeal the septennial bill, and bring back triennial parliaments, as settled at the Revolution. But notwithstanding the warmth of the opposition, the ministry, exerting all their strength, were victorious, and the motion was suppressed by the majority. However, as on this occasion the country party seemed to have gained strength, it was thought proper to dissolve the parliament; and another was called by the same proclamation.

The same disputes were carried on in this parliament as in the former. New subjects of controversy offered every day, and both sides were eager to seize them. A convention agreed on by the ministry, at the Pra- Britain, do, with Spain, became an object of warm altercation. By this the court of Spain agreed to pay 95,000l. to the English, as a satisfaction for all demands; and to discharge the whole in four months from the day of ratification. This, however, was considered as not equivalent to the damages that had been sustained, which were said to amount to 349,000l. On this occasion the minister was provoked into unusual vehemence, and branded the opposite party with the appellation of traitors. The ministry, as usual, were victorious; and the country party finding themselves out-numbered and out-voted in every debate, resolved to withdraw for ever: Walpole, being thus left without opposition, took the opportunity of passing several useful laws in their absence, in order to render the opposite party odious or contemptible.

In 1739, a new war commenced with Spain. Ever since the treaty of Utrecht, the Spaniards in America had insulted and distressed the commerce of Great Britain; and the British merchants had endeavoured to carry on an illicit trade in their dominions. As a right of cutting logwood in the bay of Campeachy, claimed by the British, gave them frequent opportunities of pushing in contraband commodities upon the continent, the Spaniards resolved to put a stop to the evil by refusing liberty to cut logwood in that place. The Spanish guardia-cochas continued their ferocities upon the British, and many British subjects were sent to dig in the mines of Potosi. One remonstrance followed another to the court of Madrid; but the only answers given were promises of inquiry, which produced no reformation. In 1739, war was declared with all proper solemnity; and soon after, Admiral Vernon, with six ships only, destroyed all the fortifications of Porto Bello, and came away victorious, with scarce the loss of a man.

As the war was thus successfully begun, supplies were cheerfully granted to prosecute it with all imaginable vigour. Commodore Anson was sent with a squadron of ships to distress the enemy in the South seas, and to co-operate occasionally with Admiral Vernon across the isthmus of Darien. This squadron was designed to act a subordinate part to a formidable armament that was to be sent against New Spain; but through the mismanagement of the ministry both these schemes were frustrated. Anson was detained till too late in the season; he then set out with five ships of the line, a frigate, and two store-ships, with about 1400 men. Coming into the stormy South seas at a very wrong season of the year, he encountered the most terrible storms; his fleet was dispersed, and his crew deplorably afflicted with the scurvy; so that with much difficulty he gained the delightful island of Juan Fernandez. Here he was joined by one ship and a frigate of seven guns. From thence failing along the coast of Chili, he plundered and burnt the town of Paita. He next traversed the great Pacific ocean, in hopes of meeting with one of the immensely rich galleons that trade from the Philippine islands to Mexico. Having refreshed his men at the island of Tinian, he set forward to China; and returning the same way he came, at last discovered the galleon, which he engaged, and took; and with this prize, valued at 313,000l. together with other captures to the value of about as much more, he returned home, after a voyage of three years. By this expedition the public sustained the loss of a fine squadron of ships, but a few individuals became possessed of immense fortunes.

The other expedition ended still more unfortunately. The armament consisted of 29 ships of the line, and all kinds of warlike stores, near 15,000 seamen, and as many land forces. The most sanguine hopes of success were entertained; but the ministry detained the fleet without any visible reason, till the season for action in America was almost over. At last, however, they arrived before the wealthy city of Carthagena. They soon became masters of the strong forts which defended the harbour. But though by this means they advanced a good deal nearer the town, they found great difficulties still before them. It was asserted, that the fleet could not lie near enough to batter the town, and therefore the remaining forts must be attempted by escalade. This dangerous experiment was tried; the guides were slain by the enemy's fire, and then the forces mistook their way. Instead of attempting the weakest place of the fort, they attacked the strongest, and where they were exposed to the fire of the whole town. Their scaling ladders were too short, and at last, after bearing a dreadful fire with great resolution for some hours, they retreated, leaving 600 men dead on the spot. The terrors of the climate now began to be more dreadful than those of war. The rainy season commenced with such violence, that it was impossible for the troops to continue their encampment. To these calamities was added the diffusion between the sea and land commanders, who blamed each other, and at last could be only brought to agree in one mortifying measure, viz. to reembark the troops, and withdraw them as quick as possible.

The miscarriage of this enterprise produced the greatest discontent; especially as other causes of complaint were now joined with it. Sir John Norris had twice failed to the coast of Spain at the head of a very powerful squadron, without doing anything to the purpose. The commerce of Britain was greatly annoyed by the Spanish privateers, who had taken 407 ships since the commencement of the war; while the British fleets seemed to be quite inactive, and to suffer one loss after another, without endeavouring in the least to make other reprisals. These discontented burst all at once upon Sir Robert Walpole; a majority in the house of commons was formed against him; he was created earl of Orford, the parliament being adjourned for a few days for that purpose; and he resigned all his employments.

The removal of this minister gave universal satisfaction. His antagonists entertained great hopes of seeing him punished; but he had laid his schemes too well to be under any apprehensions on that account; and what was worse, the new ministry were no sooner got in, than they trod in the footsteps of those they had so much exclaimed against. The nation had now become disgusted with naval operations. The people wished for a renewal of their victories in Flanders, and sent into the king ardently joined in the same wish. An army of 16,000 men was therefore shipped over into Flanders, to take part in the quarrels that were then beginning on the continent. Immense triumphs were expected from this undertaking; but they forgot that the army was not now commanded by the duke of Marlborough.

In order to give some notion of the origin of these continental quarrels, it is necessary to go back for some years. After the duke of Orleans, who had been regent of France, died, Cardinal Fleury undertook to settle the confusion in which the kingdom was then involved. Under him France repaired her losses, and enriched herself by commerce. During the long interval of peace which this minister's counsels had procured for Europe, two powers, till now unregarded, began to attract the notice and jealousy of the neighbouring nations. These were Russia and Prussia. The other states were but little prepared to renew war. The empire remained under the government of Charles VI., who had been placed on the throne by the treaty of Utrecht. Sweden continued to languish from the destructive projects of Charles XII. Denmark was powerful enough, but inclined to peace; and part of Italy still remained subject to those princes who had been imposed upon it by foreign treaties.

All these states, however, continued to enjoy a profound peace, until the death of Augustus king of Poland, by which a general flame was once more kindled in Europe. The emperor, assisted by the arms of Russia, declared for the elector of Saxony, son to the deceased king. On the other hand, France declared for Stanislaus, who had long since been nominated king of the Poles by Charles of Sweden, and whose daughter the king of France had since married. Stanislaus was gladly received at Dantzig, and acknowledged king of Poland; but here he was besieged by 10,000 Russians, the city taken, and he himself with difficulty made his escape. France, however, still resolved to assist him, as this, it was thought, would be the most effectual method of deterring the house of Austria. These views of France were seconded by Spain and Sardinia, both of which hoped to grow rich by the spoils of Austria. A French army, therefore, overran the empire, under the conduct of the old marshal Villars; while the duke of Montemar, the Spanish general, was equally victorious in the kingdom of Naples. The emperor was soon obliged to sue for peace; which was granted, but Stanislaus was neglected in the treaty. It was stipulated that he should renounce all claim to the kingdom of Poland; for which the emperor gratified France with the duchy of Lorraine, and some other valuable territories.

The emperor dying in the year 1740, the French began to think this a favourable opportunity for exerting their ambition. Regardless of treaties, therefore, particularly that called the Pragmatic Sanction, by which the late emperor's dominions were settled upon his daughter, they caused the elector of Bavaria to be crowned emperor. Thus the queen of Hungary, daughter of Charles VI., was at once stripped of her inheritance, and was left for a whole year deserted by all Europe, and without any hopes of succour. At the same time she lost the province of Silesia by an irruption of the young king of Prussia, who took the opportunity of her defenceless state to renew his pretensions to that province, of which his ancestors had been unjustly deprived. France, Saxony, and Bavaria, attacked the rest of her dominions: Britain was the only ally that seemed willing to assist her; in which, however, Sardinia, Holland, and Russia, soon after concurred.

It must be owned that Britain had no other reason for interfering in these disputes, than that the security of the electorate depended upon nicely balancing the different interests of the empire; and the ministry were willing to gratify the king. His majesty informed the parliament, that he had sent a body of British forces into the Netherlands, which he had augmented by 16,000 Hanoverians, to make a diversion upon the dominions of France, in favour of the queen of Hungary. When the supplies came to be considered, by which this additional number of Hanoverian troops was to receive pay from Britain for defending their own cause, most violent parliamentary debates ensued; but the ministry carried their point by the strength of numbers.

But, however prejudicial these continental measures might be to the true interests of Great Britain, they by the British effectively retrieved the queen of Hungary's desperate affairs, and soon began to turn the scale of victory on her side. The French were driven out of Bohemia. Her general, Prince Charles, at the head of a large army, invaded the dominions of Bavaria. Her rival, the nominal emperor, was obliged to fly before her; and being abandoned by his allies, and stripped even of his hereditary dominions, retired to Frankfort, where he lived in obscurity.

In the mean time, the British and Hanoverian army advanced, in order to effect a junction with that of Dettingen. Prince Charles of Lorraine, in which case they would have outnumbered their enemies. To prevent this, the French opposed an army of 60,000 men, upon the river Mayne, under the command of the Marshal de Noailles, who posted his troops on the east side of that river. The British army was commanded by the earl of Stair, who had learned the art of war under the great Prince Eugene; nevertheless he suffered himself to be enclosed by the enemy on every side, near a village called Dettingen. In this situation, the whole army, with the king himself, who had by this time arrived in the camp, must have been taken, had the French behaved with prudence. Their impetuosity, however, saved the whole army. They passed a defile which they ought to have contented themselves with guarding; and, under the conduct of the duke of Gramont, their horse charged the British foot with great fury. They were received with great resolution; and at last obliged to repulse the Mayne with precipitation, and the loss of about 5000 men.

Though the British were victorious in this engagement, the French were very little disconcerted by its invasion of They opposed Prince Charles, and interrupted his attempt to pass the Rhine. In Italy they also gained the French some advantages; but their chief hopes were placed on an intended invasion of England. From the violence of parliamentary disputes in England, France had been persuaded that the country was ripe for a revolution, and only wanted the presence of the Pretender to bring about a change. An invasion was therefore actually projected. The troops destined for the expedition amounted to 15,000; and preparations were made for embarking them at Dunkirk and some of the ports nearest to England, under the eye of the young Pretender. The duke de Roquefeuille, with 20 ships of the the line, was to see them safely landed on the opposite shore, and the famous Count Saxe was to command them when landed. But the whole project was disconcerted by the appearance of Sir John Norris, who with a superior fleet made up to attack them. The French fleet was obliged to put back; a very hard gale of wind damaged their transports beyond repair; and the French, now frustrated in their scheme of a sudden descent, thought fit openly to declare war.

The national joy for Sir John Norris's success, however, was soon damped by the misfortune of Admirals Matthews and Leake; who, through a misunderstanding between themselves, suffered a French fleet of 34 sail to escape them near Toulon. In the Netherlands the British arms were attended with still worse success. The French had there assembled an army of 120,000 men, commanded by Count Saxe, natural son to the late king of Poland, an officer of great experience. The English were headed by the duke of Cumberland, who had an inferior army, and was much inferior in the knowledge of war to the French general. Count Saxe, therefore, carried all before him. In 1743, he besieged Fribourg, and in the beginning of the campaign 1744, invested the strong city of Tourney. To save this place, if possible, the allies resolved to hazard an engagement; and on this ensued the bloody battle of Fontenoy, in which the allies left on the field of battle near 12,000 men, and the French almost an equal number. In consequence of this victory, Tourney was soon after taken by the French. To balance the bad success, however, Admirals Rowley and Warren had retrieved the honour of the British flag, and made several rich captures at sea. The fortresses of Louisbourg, a place of great consequence to the British commerce, surrendered to General Pepperell; while a short time after, two French East India ships, and a Spanish ship from Peru laden with treasure, put into the harbour, supposing it still their own, and were taken.

During this gleam of returning success, Charles Edward, the son of the old pretender to the British crown, resolved to make an attempt to recover what he called his right. Being furnished with some money from France, he embarked for Scotland aboard a small frigate, accompanied by the marquis of Tullibardine, Sir Thomas Sheridan, and some others; and for the conquest of the whole British empire, only brought with him seven officers and arms for 2000 men.

Fortune, however, seemed noway more favourable to this attempt than to others similar to it. His convoy, a ship of 60 guns, was disabled in an engagement with an English man of war, that it was obliged to return to Brexit, while he continued his course to the western parts of Scotland. On the 27th of July 1745, he landed on the coast of Lochaber, and was in a little time joined by the Highlanders, to the number of 1500: the ministry at first could scarcely be induced to credit his arrival; but when they could no longer doubt of it, they sent Sir John Cope with a small body of forces to oppose his progress.

By this time the young adventurer was arrived at Perth, where he performed the ceremony of proclaiming his father king of Great Britain. From thence descending towards Edinburgh, and his forces continually increasing, he entered the capital without opposition; but was unable, from want of cannon, to reduce the castle. Here he again proclaimed his father; and promised to dissolve the union, which was considered as one of the national grievances. In the meantime, Sir John Cope being reinforced by two regiments of dragoons, resolved to give the enemy battle. The rebels attacked him near Prestonpans, and in a few minutes put him and his troops to flight, with the loss of 500 men.

This victory gave the rebels great influence; and had the Pretender marched directly to England, the consequence might have been fatal to freedom. But he was amused by the promise of succours which never came; and thus induced to remain in Edinburgh till the season for action was lost. He was joined, however, by the earl of Kilmarnock, Lord Balmerino, Lords Cromarty, Elcho, Ogilvy, Pitlochry, and the eldest son of Lord Lovat, who with their vassals considerably increased his army. Lord Lovat himself, so remarkable for his treachery, was an enthusiast in favour of the Pretender, but was unwilling to act openly for fear of the ministry. But while Charles was thus trifling away his time at Edinburgh, the British ministry were taking effectual methods to oppose him. Six thousand Dutch troops, that had come over to the affluence of the crown, were dispatched northward under the command of General Wade; but, as it was then said, these could lend no assistance, being prisoners of France upon their parole, and under engagements not to oppose that power for a year. But however this be, the duke of Cumberland soon after arrived from Flanders, and was followed by another detachment of dragoons and infantry, well disciplined and inured to action; and besides these, volunteers offered themselves in every part of the kingdom.

At last, Charles resolved upon an irruption into England. He entered that country by the western border, and took the town of Carlisle; after which he continued his march southwards, having received assurances that a considerable body of forces would be landed on the southern coasts to make a diversion in his favour. He established his head quarters at Manchester, where he was joined by about 200 English formed into a regiment, under the command of Colonel Townley. From thence he pursued his march to Derby, intending to go by the way of Chester into Wales, where he hoped to be joined by a great number of malecontents; but in this he was prevented by the factions among his followers.

Being now advanced within 100 miles of London, Great concern that capital was in the utmost consternation: and had it been proceeded with the same expedition he had hitherto used, perhaps he might have made himself master of it. But he was rendered incapable of pursuing this or any other rational plan, by the discontentments which began to prevail in his army. In fact, the young Pretender was but the nominal leader of his forces; his generals, the Highland chiefs, being averse to subordination, and ignorant of command. They were now unanimous in their resolution to return to their own country, and refused to Charles was forced to comply. They retreated to Carlisle without any loss; and from thence crossing the rivers Eden and Solway, entered Scotland. They next marched to Glasgow, which was laid under severe contributions. From thence advancing to Stirling, they they were joined by Lord Lewis Gordon at the head of some forces which had been assembled in his absence. Other clans likewise came in; and from some supplies of money received from Spain, and some skirmishes with the royalists, in which he was victorious, the Pretender's affairs began to wear a more promising aspect. Being joined by Lord Drummond, he invested the castle of Stirling, in the siege of which much time was consumed to no purpose. General Hawley, who commanded a considerable body of forces near Edinburgh, undertook to raise this siege, and advanced towards the rebel army as far as Falkirk. After two days spent in mutually examining each other's strength, an engagement ensued, in which the king's forces were entirely defeated, with the loss of their tents and artillery.

This was the end of all the triumphs of the rebel army. The duke of Cumberland having arrived, was put at the head of the troops at Edinburgh, which amounted to about 14,000 men. With these he advanced to Aberdeen, where he was joined by several of the nobility attached to the house of Hanover; the enemy in the mean time retreating before him. He next advanced to the banks of the Spey, a deep and rapid river, where the rebels might have disputed his passage; but their contentions with one another were now risen to such a height, that they could scarce agree in anything. At last they resolved to wait their pursuers. An engagement ensued at Culloden*, near Inverness; in which the rebels were defeated with great slaughter, and a final period was put to all the hopes of the young adventurer. The conquerors behaved with the greatest cruelty; refusing quarter to the wounded, the unarmed, and the defenceless; some were slain, who had only been spectators of the combat, and soldiers were seen to anticipate the safe employment of the executioner. The duke immediately after the action ordered 36 deserters to be executed; the conquerors spread terror wherever they came; and after a short space, the whole country round was one dreadful scene of plunder, slaughter, and desolation.

Immediately after the engagement, the young Pretender fled away with a captain of Fitzjames's cavalry; and when their horses were fatigued, they both alighted, and separately fought for safety. There is a striking resemblance between the adventures of Charles II. after the battle of Worcester, and those of the young Pretender after the battle of Culloden. For some days he wandered in the country. Sometimes he found refuge in caves and cottages, without any attendants at all. Sometimes he lay in forests with one or two companions of his distress, continually pursued by the troops of the conqueror, there being a reward of 30,000l. offered for taking him either dead or alive. In the course of his adventures, he had occasion to trust his life to the fidelity of above 50 individuals; not one of whom could be prevailed upon, by so great a reward as was offered, to betray him whom they looked upon to be their king's son.

For six months the unfortunate Charles continued to wander in the frightful wilds of Glengary, often hemmed round by his pursuers, but still rescued by some providential accident from the impending danger. At length a privateer of St Maloës, hired by his adherents, arrived in Loch Ranach, in which he embarked in the most wretched attire. He was clad in a short coat of black frize, threadbare; over which was a common Highland plaid girt round him by a belt, from which hung a pistol and dagger. He had not been shifted for many weeks; his eyes were hollow, his visage wan, and his constitution greatly impaired by famine and fatigue. He was accompanied by Sullivan and Sheridan, two Irish adherents, who had shared all his calamities; together with Cameron of Lochiel, his brother, and a few other exiles. They set sail for France; and after having been chased by two English men of war, arrived in safety at a place called Roéau near Morlaix in Bretagne.

While the Pretender was thus pursued, the scaffolds and gibbets were preparing for his adherents. Seventeen officers were hanged, drawn, and quartered, at Kennington common in the neighbourhood of London; nine were executed in the same manner at Carlisle; and eleven at York. A few obtained pardons, and a considerable number of the common men were transported to America. The earls of Kilmarnock and Cromarty, and Lord Balmerino, were tried and found guilty of high treason. Cromarty was pardoned; but Kilmarnock and Balmerino were executed; as was also Mr Radcliffe brother to the late earl of Derwentwater, who was sentenced upon a former conviction. Lord Lovat was tried, and suffered some time after.

Immediately after the suppression of the rebellion, New regulations in Scotland, which were equally conducive to the happiness of the people and the tranquillity of the united kingdoms. The Highlanders had till that time continued to wear the military dress of their ancestors, and never went without arms. In consequence of this, they considered themselves as a body of people distinct from the rest of the nation, and were ready upon the shortest notice to second the insurrections of their chiefs. Their habits were now reformed by an act of legislature, and they were compelled to wear clothes of the common fashion. But what contributed still more to their real felicity was the abolition of that hereditary jurisdiction which their chieftains exerted over them. The power of their chieftains was totally destroyed, and every subject in that part of the kingdom was granted a participation in the common liberty.

Soon after the battle of Culloden, the duke of Cumberland returned to Flanders, where he resumed the command of an army to which he was by no means equal. The French carried everything before them; and they reduced under their dominion all those strong towns which had been taken by the duke of Marlborough, and formed a barrier to the United Provinces. They gained a considerable victory at Roucourt; which, however, cost them as many men as they destroyed of the enemy; but these they could more easily spare, as they were much more numerous. Another victory which they obtained at La Feldt, served to depress the allied army still lower. But the taking of Bergen-op-Zoom, the strongest fortification of Brabant, reduced the Dutch to a state of desperation.

These victories and successes in Flanders were, however, counterbalanced by almost equal disappointments. In Italy, the marshal Belleisle's brother, attempting to penetrate at the head of 34,000 men into Piedmont, was defeated and killed. A fleet was fitted out for the recovery of Cape Breton, but without success. Two others were fitted out, the one to make a descent upon the British colonies in America, and the other to carry on the operations in the East Indies; but these were attacked by Anson and Warren, and nine of their ships taken. Soon after this, Commodore Fox, with six ships of war, took above 40 French ships richly laden from St Domingo; and soon after this the French fleet was defeated by Admiral Hawke, who took seven ships of the line and several frigates.

For a long time Louis had been desirous of a general tranquillity; and this desire he had even expressed to Sir John Ligonier, who was taken prisoner at the battle of La Feldt. But now the bad success of his admirals at sea, his armies in Italy, the frequent bankruptcies of his merchants at home, and the election of a stadtholder in Holland, who gave spirit to the opposition; all these contributed to make him weary of the war, and to propose terms of accommodation. This was what the allies had long wished for, but had been ashamed to demand. A congress, therefore, was held at Aix-la-Chapelle, where a treaty was concluded on the following terms: 1. That all prisoners on each side should be mutually given up, and all conquests restored. 2. That the duchies of Parma, Placentia, and Guastalla, should be ceded to Don Philip, heir apparent to the Spanish crown; after whom the dominions should return to the house of Austria. 3. That the fortifications of Dunkirk towards the sea should be demolished; and that the British ship annually sent with slaves to the coast of New Spain should have this privilege continued for four years. 4. That the king of Prussia should be confirmed in the possession of Silesia, and that the queen of Hungary should be secured in the possession of her patrimonial dominions. But the most mortifying clause was, that the king of Great Britain should immediately, after the ratification of this treaty, send two persons of rank to France as hostages, until restitution should be made of Cape Breton and all other British conquests made during the war. No mention was made of the searching British vessels in the American seas, though this was the original cause of the quarrel. The limits of their respective possessions in North America were not ascertained; nor did they receive any equivalent for those forts which they restored to the enemy.

In the year 1751, died Frederic prince of Wales, of a pleurisy, thought at first to be no way dangerous. He was greatly regretted; for his good-nature had rendered him popular, and those who opposed the present administration had grounded all their hopes of redress upon his accession to the throne.

Some time before this, viz. in the year 1749, a scheme was entered upon, which the nation in general imagined would be very advantageous. This was the encouraging those who had been discharged the army or navy to become settlers in Nova Scotia. This country is cold, barren, and almost incapable of cultivation. Nevertheless, on account of this barren spot, the English and French renewed the war, which soon after spread with such terrible devastation over every part of the globe. The possession of this country was reckoned necessary to defend the English colonies to the north, and to preserve their superiority in the fisheries in that part of the world. The French, however, who had been long settled in the back parts, resolved to use every method to dispossess the new comers, and spirited up the Indians to begin hostilities. Another source of dispute also sprung up soon after in the same part of the world. The French, pretending to have first discovered the mouth of the river Mississippi, claimed the whole adjacent country towards New Mexico on the east, quite to the Appalachian mountains on the west. In order to assert their claims, as they found several English who had settled beyond these mountains, they dispossessed them of their new settlements, and built such forts as would command the whole country round about.

Negotiations, mutual accusations, and hostilities, first took place between the two powers; at length, in 1756, four operations were undertaken by the British in America at once. Colonel Monkton had orders to drive the French from their encroachments upon the province of Nova Scotia. General Johnson was sent against Crown Point; General Shirley against Niagara, to secure the forts on the river; and General Braddock against Fort du Queene. In these expeditions, Monkton was successful; Johnson also was victorious, though he failed in taking the fort against which he was sent; Shirley was thought to have lost the season of operation by delay; and Braddock was defeated and killed.

In return for this bad success, the British made reprisals at sea; and in this they were so successful, that the French navy was unable to recover itself during the continuance of the war that was shortly after declared on both sides. The first step of the French was to threaten an invasion. Several bodies of their troops were sent down to the coasts that lay opposite to the British shores; these were instructed in the manner of embarking and relanding from flat-bottomed boats, which were made in great numbers for that expedition. The number of men amounted to 50,000; but all discovered the utmost reluctance to the undertaking. The ministry were greatly alarmed. They applied to the Dutch for 6000 men, which they were by treaty obliged to furnish in case of an invasion. This supply was refused, the Dutch alleging, that their treaty was to send the troops in case of an actual, and not a threatened, invasion. The king, therefore, finding he could not have the Dutch forces till their assistance would be too late, desisted entirely from his demand; and the Dutch with great amity returned him thanks for withdrawing his request. Upon this, 10,000 Hessians and Hanoverians were brought over. But this occasioned great discontent. The ministry were reviled for such disgraceful concession, as if the nation was unable to defend itself. The people only demanded a vigorous exertion of their own internal strength, and then feared no force that could be led to invade them.

The British invasion, however, never took place; Minorca but a French army landed in Minorca, and invested invaded, the citadel of St Philip's, which was reckoned the strongest in Europe; but the garrison was weak, and no way fitted to stand a vigorous siege. To raise this siege, Admiral Byng was dispatched with a squadron of ten men of war, with orders to relieve Minorca, or at any rate to throw a body of troops into the garri- This last he reckoned too hazardous an undertaking; nor did he even attempt it. Soon after, a French fleet appeared nearly equal in force to his own; but the admiral resolved to act only upon the defensive. The French advanced; a flight engagement ensued with part of the English fleet; after which, the French slowly sailed away, and another opportunity never occurred of coming to a closer engagement. After this, it was resolved in a council of war, to return to Gibraltar to refit, and that the relief of Minorca was impracticable. For this conduct Byng was brought home under arrest, tried, and sentenced to death. His sentence was to be shot; and he suffered with the greatest resolution, after delivering a paper filled with protestations of his innocence as to any treacherous intention.

After the conquest of Minorca, the French declared that they would revenge all injuries they should sustain in their colonies on the king of Britain's dominions in Prussia. Upon this, the court of London, eager to preserve Hanover, entered into a treaty with the court of Russia, by which it was stipulated, that a body of 50,000 Russians should be ready to act in the British service, in case Hanover should be invaded by the French. For this the zarina was to receive 100,000l. annually, to be paid in advance. This treaty was opposed by the king of Prussia. He had long considered himself as guardian of the interests of Germany, and was therefore alarmed at a treaty which threatened to deluge the empire with an army of barbarians. Besides, he was already apprised of an agreement between the Austrians and Russians, by which the latter were to enter the empire and strip him of his late conquest of Silesia. He therefore declared, that he would not suffer any foreign forces to enter the empire, either as auxiliaries or principals. The king of Britain now found himself obliged to drop his Russian connexion, and conclude a treaty with the king of Prussia. As both monarchs wished only to prevent the invasion of Germany, they soon came to an agreement to assist each other mutually. From this alliance a new combination took place among the European powers, quite opposite to the former; and their forces were drawn out in the following manner. Britain opposed France in America, Asia, and on the ocean. France attacked Hanover; which the king of Prussia undertook to protect, while Britain promised him troops and money to assist his operations. Austria had her aims on the dominions of Prussia, and drew the elector of Saxony into the same designs. In these views the Austrians were seconded by France, Sweden, and Russia, who had hopes of acquiring a settlement in the west of Europe.

Thus the king of Prussia launched into the tumult of war, having only the king of Britain for his ally, while the most potent states of Europe were his antagonists. He now performed exploits perhaps unequalled in the annals of modern ages; for a particular account of which, see the article PRUSSIA. The British ministry, in order to procure a diversion in his favour, planned an enterprise against the coast of France. The destination of the fleet equipped for this purpose was kept a profound secret. At last it appeared before Rochefort; where the commander, having trifled away their time in deliberating how to proceed, secured the little island of Aix, an easy and an useless conquest; soon after which, they returned home without attempting anything else. By this miscarriage the ministry were so discouraged, that they had thoughts of abandoning the king of Prussia to his fate; and the king was actually meditating a negotiation of this nature, when he was prevented by the expostulations of his distressed ally. From motives of generosity, therefore, more than of interest, it was resolved to continue to assist him; and succours, which had long fled from the British arms, once more began to return with double splendour.

It was in the East Indies where this returning succour first began to appear (for an account of which see the article INDOSTAN); and their conquests in the western part of the world were about this time still more splendid than those in the east. But these successes must partly at least, be ascribed to the vigorous administration of Mr William Pitt, who about this time came into power. An expedition was set on foot against Cape Breton, under General Amherst and Admiral Boscawen; another under General Abercrombie, against Crown Point and Ticonderago; and a third, under Brigadier-General Forbes, against Fort du Queine. The fortresses of Louisbourg, which defended the island of Cape Breton, was very strong both by nature and art; the garrison was numerous, the commander vigilant, and every precaution had been taken to prevent a landing; but the activity of the British forces mounted every obstacle, the place was surrendered by capitulation, and its fortifications were demolished. The expedition against Fort du Queine was equally successful; but that against Crown Point once more miscarried. General Abercrombie attacked the French in their intrenchments, was repulsed with great slaughter, and obliged to retire to his camp at Lake George. But though in this respect the British arms were unsuccessful, yet, upon the whole, the campaign of 1753 was greatly in their favour. The taking of Fort du Queine served to remove from their colonies the terror of the incursions of the Indians, while it interrupted the correspondence along a chain of forts with which the French had environed the British settlements in America; so that the succeeding campaign promised great success.

In 1759, it was resolved to attack the French in several parts of their empire at once. General Amherst, with a body of 12,000 men was commanded to attack Quebec; General Wolfe was to undertake the siege of Quebec; while General Prideaux and Sir William Johnson were to attempt a French fort near the cataracts of Niagara. This last expedition was the first that succeeded. The siege was begun with vigour, and promised an easy conquest; but General Prideaux was killed in the trenches by the bursting of a mortar, so that the whole command devolved on General Johnson. A body of French troops, sensible of the importance of the place, attempted to relieve it; but were utterly defeated and dispersed; soon after which, the garrison surrendered prisoners of war. On his arrival at the forts of Crown Point and Ticonderago, General Amherst found them deserted and destroyed. There now remained, therefore, but one decisive blow to reduce all North America under the British dominion; and this was by the taking of Quebec*, the capital of Canada.

*See Quebec. This expedition was commanded by Admiral Saunders and General Wolfe. The enterprise was attended with difficulties which appeared insurmountable; but all these difficulties were got over by the conduct of General Wolfe, and the bravery of his men. He engaged and put to flight the French under Montcalm; but to the great regret of the British, their general was killed in the action. The surrender of Quebec was the consequence of this victory, which was soon followed by the cession of all Canada. The following season, indeed, the French made a vigorous effort to recover the city; but by the resolution of Governor Murray, and the appearance of a British fleet under the command of Lord Colville, they were obliged to abandon the enterprise. The whole province was soon after reduced by the prudence and activity of General Amherst, who obliged the French army to capitulate; and it has since remained annexed to the British empire. About the same time also the island of Guadeloupe was reduced by Commodore More and General Hopson.

The British affairs in Germany had at the beginning of the war worn a very unfavourable aspect. The Hanoverians were commanded by the duke of Cumberland, who was greatly outnumbered by the enemy. He was driven beyond the Weser, the passage of which might have been disputed with some appearance of success; but the French were suffered to pass unmolested. The Hanoverians were driven from one part of the country to another, till at length they made a stand near a village called Hassenbach, where it was hoped the numbers of the enemy would have the least opportunity of coming to a general engagement. The Hanoverians, however, left the field of battle to the French, after a faint resistance. Their enemies pursued, and the duke retired towards Stade; by which means he marched into a country from whence he could neither procure provisions nor attack the enemy with any hopes of success. Here, being unable either to escape or advance, he was compelled to sign a capitulation by which the whole army laid down their arms, and were dispersed into different quarters of cantonment. By this remarkable capitulation, which was called the Capitulation of Closter Seven, Hanover was obliged to submit quietly to the French, who were now determined to turn their arms against the king of Prussia.

Soon after this capitulation, both sides began to complain that the treaty was not strictly observed. The Hanoverians exclaimed against the rapacity of the French general and the brutality of his soldiers. The French retorted the charge against them, accused them of insolence and infraction; and being sensible of their own superiority, resolved to bind them strictly to their terms of agreement. The Hanoverians only wished for a pretence to take arms, and a general to head them. Neither was long wanting. The oppressions of the tax-gatherers, whom the French had appointed, were considered as so severe, that the army rose to vindicate the freedom of their country, while Ferdinand, prince of Brunswick, put himself at their head. As soon as this was known in Britain, large supplies were granted both for the service of the king of Prussia, and to enable the Hanoverian army to act vigorously in conjunction with him. A small body of British forces was sent over to join Prince Ferdinand under the duke of Marlborough. After some inconsiderable successes at Crevelt, the duke of Marlborough dying, the command of the British forces devolved on Lord George Sackville. A misunderstanding arose between him and Prince Ferdinand, which appeared at the battle of Minden that was fought shortly after. Lord George pretended that he did not understand the orders sent him by the prince, and of consequence did not obey them. The allies gained the victory, which would have been more decisive had the British commander obeyed his orders. He was soon after recalled, tried by a court-martial, found guilty of disobedience, and declared incapable of serving in any military command for the future.

After this victory it was imagined that one reinforcement more of British troops would terminate the war in favour of the allies; and that reinforcement was quickly sent. The British army in Germany was augmented to upwards of 30,000 men, and sanguine hopes of conquest were generally entertained. These hopes, however, were soon found to be ill-founded. The allies were defeated at Corbach; but retrieved their honour at Exdorf. A victory at Warbourg followed shortly after, and another at Zierenberg: But then they suffered a defeat at Compen; after which, both sides retired into winter-quarters.

On the 25th of October 1760, happened the death of King George II. He had risen at his usual hour, and observed to his attendants, that as the weather was fine, he would take a walk into the garden of Kensington, where he then resided. In a few minutes after his return, being left alone, he was heard to fall down upon the floor. The noise of this bringing his attendants into the room, they lifted him into bed; where he desired, with a faint voice, that the princess Amelia might be sent for: but before she could reach the apartment, he expired, in the 77th year of his age and 33d of his reign. An attempt was made to bleed him, but without effect; and afterwards the surgeons, upon opening him, discovered that the right ventricle of the heart was ruptured, and a great quantity of blood discharged through the aperture.

King George III. ascended the throne amidst the greatest successes both by sea and land. At this time, indeed, the efforts of Britain in every quarter of the globe were truly astonishing. The king of Prussia received a subsidy; a large body of English forces commanded the extensive peninsula of India; another army of 20,000 men confirmed their conquests in North America; 30,000 men were employed in Germany; and a great many more were dispersed in the different garrisons in different parts of the world; but all this was surpassed by the astonishing naval force, which carried command wherever it came, and had totally annihilated the French maritime power. The courage and conduct of the English admirals excelled everything that had been heard of before; neither superior force, nor number, nor even the terrors of the tempest, could intimidate them. Admiral Hawke gained a complete victory over an equal number of French ships in Quiberon Bay on the coast of Bretagne, in the midst of a tempest, during the darkness of night, and, what a seaman fears still more, in the neighbourhood of a rocky shore. As soon as his present majesty had met with his parliament, which was on November 18, 1760, he confirmed the hopes of his allies, and gave assurances of his intentions to prosecute the war with vigour. By this time, however, the people were in some measure weary with conquests; especially with those in Germany, from which they could never hope for any solid advantage, and which were gained at an immense expense to the nation. Disputes concerning the propriety of the German war were carried on, and the general run of popular opinion seemed to be rather against than for it. For some time, however, no change took place in the method of carrying on the war. In 1761 proposals of peace were made between the belligerent powers of Europe; and for this purpose Mr Stanley was sent to Paris and Mr Bully to London; but the French, desiring to draw Spain into a confederacy with them, seem not to have been sincere in their intentions; and thus the treaty came to nothing.

An enterprise was projected against the island of Belleisle, near the coast of France, which was conducted by Commodore Keppel and General Hodgson.* The place was conquered, with the loss of 1800 men killed and wounded on the part of the British; and however unimportant this conquest might be, the rejoicings on account of it were great. In Germany, the campaign was unsuccessful on the part of the allies. At first, indeed, they drove the French quite out of the territory of Hesse, and laid siege to the city of Cassel; but being defeated at Stangerode, they were forced to raise the siege, retire behind the Dymel, and again abandon Hesse to their enemies. Here they were followed and attacked by the French; who, though defeated in that attempt, were with difficulty prevented from making themselves masters of Munster and Brunswick.

All this time an appearance of negociation had been carried on; but at last the French having brought their designs with the court of Spain to a bearing, Mr Bully delivered to Mr Pitt a private memorial, signifying, that, in order to establish the peace on a lasting foundation, the king of Spain might be induced to guarantee the treaty; and to prevent the differences which then subsisted between Britain and Spain from producing a fresh war in Europe, he proposed, that in this negociation the three points which had been disputed between the crown of England and Spain might be finally settled. First, the restitution of some captures made upon the Spanish flag. Secondly, the privilege of the Spanish nation to fish upon the banks of Newfoundland. Thirdly, the demolition of the English settlements made in the bay of Honduras. This memorial was returned as wholly inadmissible. Mr Pitt declared, that it would be looked upon as an affront to the dignity of his master, and incompatible with the sincerity of the negociation, to make any further mention of such a circumstance.

Spanish war Mr Pitt being now thoroughly convinced of the futility of these designs of Spain, proposed immediately to declare war against that kingdom. But this proposal being rejected, he resigned his employment of secretary and is crea-of state; after which, he was created earl of Chatham, and had a pension of 3000l. per annum settled upon him for three lives.

Soon after this, however, the new administration found that Mr Pitt was in the right, and war was declared between Great Britain and Spain. As Portugal was a useful ally of Britain, it was resolved by the French and Spaniards to attack that kingdom, which was then in no capacity of defending itself. The Portuguese monarch was by the most haughty memorials commanded to accede to the confederacy against Britain, and threatened with the vengeance of France and Spain in case of refusal. It was in vain that he promised to observe a strict neutrality, and urged the obligations he was under to the king of Britain; this moderate and reasonable reply only drew on more haughty and insulting answers. His Portuguese majesty, however, continued to reject their proposals in the most resolute manner; and concluded his last declaration with these words, that "it would affect him less, though reduced to the last extremity, of which the great Judge is the sole arbiter, to let the last tile of his palace fall, and to see his faithful subjects spill the last drop of their blood, than to sacrifice, together with the honour of his crown, all that Portugal holds most dear; and to submit, by such extraordinary means, to become an unheard-of example to all pacific powers, who will no longer be able to enjoy the benefit of neutrality, whenever a war shall be kindled between other powers with which the former are connected by defensive treaties." The declaration was made on the 27th of April 1762; and soon after, France and Spain declared war jointly against Portugal.

As the design of the courts of France and Spain in making war with Portugal, was professedly to prevent Great Britain from the military and commercial use of the ports of that kingdom, their principal endeavours were aimed at the two great ports where the British used to reside, viz. Oporto and Lisbon. With this view, three inroads were to be made; one to the north; another to the south; while the third was made in the middle provinces, in order to sustain these two bodies, and preserve a communication between them. The first body of troops was commanded by the marquis of Savaria; and entered the north-east angle of Portugal, marching towards Miranda. This town might possibly have retarded their progress, had not a powder-magazine been blown up by accident; and the Spaniards entered on the 9th of May by the breaches made by this explosion. From thence they marched to Braganza, which surrendered six days after Miranda. Moncorvo was taken in like manner; every thing was clear before them to the banks of the Douro; and they became masters of almost the whole extensive province of Tralos Montes. Oporto was given up for lost, and the admiralty prepared transports to carry off the effects of the British merchants. On the banks of the Douro, however, the career of this body was checked. The peasants, animated and guided by some British officers, seized a difficult pass, and drove the enemy back to Moncorvo.

The second body of Spaniards entered the province of Beira, at the villages called Val de Mula and Val de Coelho. They were joined by strong detachments, amounting to almost the whole army in Tralos Montes; and immediately laid siege to Almeida, the strongest and best provided place on the frontiers of Portugal. This place was defended with sufficient resolution; but, like the rest, was obliged to surrender on the Britain. 25th of August. The Spaniards then overran the whole territory of Castel Branco, a principal district of the province of Beira, making their way southward until they approached the banks of the Tagus. During the whole of their progress, and indeed during the whole of the campaign, the allied troops of Great Britain and Portugal had nothing that could be called an army in the field, and they could not think of opposing the enemy in a pitched battle. All that could be done was by the defence of passes, skirmish, and surprise.

By this time the count of La Lippe Buckeburg had arrived in Portugal, to the inexpressible joy of the whole nation. The third Spanish army had assembled on the frontiers of Estremadura, with a design to invade the province of Alentejo; and had this body of troops been joined to the others, they would probably, in spite of all opposition, have forced their way to Lisbon itself; had it acted separately, it might have greatly distracted the defendants, so as to enable some other body of forces to penetrate to that city. The count, therefore, resolved to prevent their entrance into the kingdom; and with this view dispatched Brigadier-general Burgoyne to attack an advanced body of Spaniards which lay on their frontiers, in a town called Valenta de Alcantara. On the 27th of August the town was surprised; the general was taken who intended to have commanded in the invasion, together with one colonel, two captains, and 17 subaltern officers. One of the best regiments in the Spanish service was also entirely destroyed; and thus the enemy were in all probability prevented from entering Alentejo.

That part of the Spanish army which acted in the territory of Castel Branco had made themselves masters of several important passes, which they obliged some bodies of Portuguese to abandon. The combined army of British and Portuguese pretended to retire before them, in order to draw them into the mountainous tracts. They attacked the rear of the allies, but were repulsed with loss. Still, however, they continued matters of the country, and nothing remained but the passage of the Tagus to enable them to take up their quarters in the province of Alentejo. This the count designed to prevent; and in this service General Burgoyne was employed, who formed a design of surprising them. The execution was committed to Colonel Lee, who, in the night of October 6th, fell upon their rear, dispersed the whole body with considerable slaughter, destroyed their magazines, and returned with scarce any loss. The season was now far advanced; immense quantities of rain fell; the roads were destroyed; and the Spaniards, having seized no advanced post where they could maintain themselves, and being unprovided with magazines for the support of their horde, everywhere fell back to the frontiers of Spain.

No less successful were the British arms in America and the East Indies. From the French were taken the islands of Martinico, St Lucia, St Vincent, and Grenada; from the Spaniards the strong fortress called Havana, in the island of Cuba. By the acquisition of the first mentioned islands the British became the sole and undisturbed possessors of all the Caribbees; and held that chain of innumerable islands which forms an immense bow, extending from the eastern point of Hispaniola, almost to the continent of South America. The conquest of the Havannah cost a number of brave men; more of whom were destroyed by the climate than the enemy. It was in this place that the fleets from the several parts of the Spanish West Indies, called galleons and flota, assembled, before they finally set out on their voyage for Europe. The acquisition of this place, therefore, united in itself all the advantages which had been acquired in war. It was a military advantage of the highest class: it was equal to plunder the greatest naval victory, by its effect on the enemy's found in marine; and in the plunder it equalled the produce of a national subsidy. Nine of the enemy's men of war, with four frigates, were taken; three of their capital ships had been sunk in the harbour at the beginning of the siege; two more were on the stocks in great wardens, and these were destroyed. In money and valuable merchandizes, the plunder did not fall short of £3,000,000 sterling. To this success in the western capture of part of the world may be added the capture of the Spanish treasure-ship called the Hermione, by the Active and Favourite king's ships. This happened on the 21st of May 1762, just as she was entering one of the ports of Old Spain, and the prize was little short of £1,000,000 sterling.

In the East Indies an expedition was undertaken against the Philippine islands, which was committed to Colonel Draper, who arrived for this purpose at Madras in the latter end of June 1762. The 79th regiment was the only regular corps that could be spared for this service. Every thing was conducted with the greatest celerity and judgment. The British forces landed at Manilla on the 24th of September; on the 6th of October the governor was obliged to surrender at discretion; and soon after, the galleon bound from Manilla to Acapulco, laden with rich merchandizes, to galleon the value of more than half a million, was taken by two taken frigates called the Argo and Panther. By the conquest of Manilla, 14 considerable islands fell into the hands of the British; which from their extent, fertility, and convenience of commerce, furnished the materials of a great kingdom. By this acquisition, joined to our former successes, we secured all the avenues of the Spanish trade, and interrupted all communications between the parts of their vast but unconnected empire. The conquest of the Havannah had cut off in a great measure the intercourse of their wealthy continental colonies with Europe: the reduction of the Philippines excluded them from Asia; and the plunder taken was far more than sufficient to indemnify the charges of the expedition; a circumstance not very common in modern wars. It amounted to upwards of a million and a half; of which the East India Company, on whom the charge of the enterprise in a great measure lay, were by contract to have a third part.

All this time the war in Germany had continued with the utmost violence; the allies under Prince Ferdinand had continued to give the highest proofs of their valour, but no decisive advantage could be obtained against the French. It was, however, no longer the interest of Britain to continue a destructive war. There never had been a period so fortunate or glorious to this island. In the course of this war she had conquered a tract of continent of immense extent, Britain. tent. Her American territory approached to the borders of Asia, and came near to the frontiers of the Russian and Chinese dominions. She had conquered 25 islands, all of them distinguished for their magnitude, their riches, or the importance of their situation. By sea or land she had gained 12 battles, had reduced nine fortified cities, and near 40 castles and forts. She had taken or destroyed above 100 ships of war from her enemies, and acquired at least 10,000,000l. in plunder.

By such unexampled and wide-extended conquests, it is no wonder that the French and Spaniards were desirous of a peace; which was at length concluded at Paris on the 10th of February 1763. The terms granted them were by many thought too favourable. The principal of them were, That the French king should relinquish all claims to Nova Scotia; that he should likewise give up all the country of Canada; and that for the future the boundary betwixt the British and French dominions in America should be fixed by a line drawn along the middle of the river Mississippi from its source to the river Iberville, and from thence by a line drawn along the middle of this river, and the lakes Maurepas and Pontchartrain, to the sea. The islands of St Pierre, Miquelon, Martinico, Gaudaloupe, Marigalante, Defrada, St Lucia, and Belleisle, were restored to France; Minorca, Grenada, and the Grenadines, St Vincent, Dominica, and Tobago, were ceded to Britain. In Africa, the island of Goree was restored to France; and the river Senegal, with all its forts and dependencies ceded to Great Britain. In the East Indies, all the forts and factories taken from the French were restored. In Europe, the fortifications of Dunkirk were to be destroyed; and all the countries, fortresses, &c. belonging to the electorate of Hanover, the duke of Brunswick, and the count of La Lippe Buckeburg, restored. With regard to Spain, the British fortifications on the bay of Honduras were to be demolished; and the Spaniards were to desist from their claim of right to fish on the Newfoundland bank. The Havannah was restored; in consequence of which, Florida, St Augustine, and the bay of Pensacola, were ceded to Britain, and the Spaniards were to make peace with Portugal; all other countries not particularly mentioned were to be restored to their respective owners at the beginning of the war.

The conclusion of the war did not by any means tend to heal those divisions which had arisen on the resignation of Mr Pitt; on the contrary, it furnished abundant matter of complaint for the discontented party, whose views seem at that time only to have been the embarrassment and disturbance of an administration which they were not able to subvert. At the time the treaty was under consideration, however, only some faint attempts were made to oppose it; but it soon appeared, that though this opposition had proved so feeble, the spirit of the party was far from being exhausted. The state of affairs at that time indeed greatly favoured the views of those who delighted in turbulence and faction. A long and expensive war had drained the national treasure, and greatly increased the public debt. Heavy taxes had already been imposed, and it was still as necessary to keep up these, and even to impose new ones, as though the war had not ceased. Thus the bulk of the nation, who imagined that content and riches ought to go hand in hand, were easily induced to believe that administration arbitrary and oppressive, which continued to load them with fresh taxes after such great successes as had attended the British arms for some years past.

It must indeed be owned, that the new administration appear not to have been sufficiently wary in this affair raised respect. Among other methods of raising the sugar tax, for 1763, they had thought proper to lay a duty of four shillings per hogshead upon cider, payable by the maker, and to be collected in the same manner as other excises. The other articles of supply furnished also matter of declamation for the members in opposition; but this inflamed the popular fury to a great degree, and made them readily imbibe as truth whatever was thrown out by the minority in their parliamentary debates. Besides the usual declamations, that it was oppressive, unconstitutional, and injurious to the landholder and farmer, the smallness of the sum to be raised by it was now urged. This was said to indicate, that the supplying the wants of government could not be the sole motive for imposing such a duty. It was further urged, with much show of lamentation, that now the houses of all orders of people, noblemen of the first rank not excepted, were liable to be entered and searched at the pleasure of excisemen, a proceeding which they denominated in express terms "a badge of slavery." Thus it was spoken throughout all the cider counties, by the city of London, and by most of the incorporations throughout the kingdom. The city had been displeased by the late changes in administration, and had not yet recovered their good humour. They instructed their representatives to oppose the passing of the bill with all possible vigour, and gave petitions against it to every branch of the legislature; a measure till that time totally unprecedented; two protests were also entered against it in the house of lords; and in short the kingdom of England was thrown into an almost universal ferment.

It is not to be doubted that the friends of administration were able to bring arguments sufficiently plausible in favour of their scheme; but the utmost force of reason will go but a very little way in quieting popular clamour; and while opposition was railing against ministry within doors, every method was taken to excite the fury of the people without. Virulent libels, the audacity of which far exceeded anything known in former times, now made their appearance; and such was the general intemperance in this respect, that it would be difficult to determine which side paid least regard to any kind of decency or decorum.

In the midst of this general ferment, the earl of Bute unexpectedly resigned his place of first lord of the treasury. His resignation quickly became an object of general speculation; for some he was highly censured for leaving his friends at the time when a little perseverance might have defeated all the designs of his enemies, and established his own power in the most solid foundation. Such conduct, they said, must discourage the friends of government, and at the same time give proportionable encouragement to its adversaries to insult it, as they perceived ministry unable to resist the first gust of popular fury. Others contended, that the earl was perhaps the least influenced by popular opinion of any man in the world. He had demonstrated his firmness by taking a share in the dangerous but necessary affair of concluding peace; and, this being accomplished, he had fully obtained his end, and performed the service to his country which was desired. He now resolved that the factious party should not have even the pretence of objecting his personal ambition as the cause of disturbances which they themselves had excited; and thus his resignation would tend to put an end to these troubles, at the same time that it showed the authors of them in their proper colours.

The event, however, showed that the former reasoning was, in the present case, nearest the truth. The popular resentment was not in the least abated by the resignation. His lordship, though now withdrawn from the offensive administration of affairs, was still considered as principal director of the cabinet; and this opinion gained the more ground that none of the popular leaders were yet taken in, nor any apparent change made in the conduct of the new administration.

No reasonable objection could now be made to those who filled the great offices of state. Mr Grenville, who succeeded the earl of Bute in the treasury, was a man of approved integrity, understanding, and experience. Lord Holland was universally considered as a very able man in office, and had already filled many high employments with a great degree of reputation. The other secretary, Lord Egremont, though he had not been long in office, was in every respect of an unexceptionable character. The other departments were filled in a similar manner, yet the discontented and public clamours were not diminished. It was now said that the new ministers were not chosen on account of any superior gifts of nature or fortune, but merely because they had the art of infusing themselves into favour at court in such a manner that any inconvenience would be submitted to rather than part with them. The sole reason of their appointment therefore was, that they might act as the passive instruments of the late minister, who though, from considerations of his own personal safety, he had thought proper to retire from business, yet had not abandoned his ambitious projects, but continued to direct everything as though he had still been present. Opposition to the new ministers was therefore opposition to him; and it became those who understood the true interest of their country, and had a real regard to it, not to suffer such a scheme of clandestine administration.

Whether the party who made these assertions really believed them or not cannot be known; but the effect was exactly the same as though they had. The great object of both parties most probably was power; but their different situations required that they should profess different political principles. The friends of Lord Bute and of the succeeding administration were for preserving to the crown the full exercise of a power which could not be disputed, viz. that of choosing its own servants. Their opponents, without denying this power, contended, that, according to the spirit of the constitution, the crown should be directed to the exercise of this public duty only by motives of national utility, and not by private friendship. In appointing the officers of state, therefore, they insisted that respect should be paid to those possessed of great talents, who had done eminent services to the nation, enjoyed the confidence of the nobility, and had influence amongst the landed and mercantile interests. The observance of this rule, they contended, was the only proper balance which could be had against the enormous influence of the crown arising from the disposal of so many places; nor could the nation be reconciled to this power by any other means than a very popular use of it. Men might indeed be appointed according to the strict letter of the law; but unless there were men in whom the majority of the nation already put confidence, they never would be satisfied, nor think themselves secure against attempts on the constitution of the kingdom. When ministers also found themselves recommended to the royal favour, and as it were presented to their places, by the esteem of the people, they would be studious to deserve and secure themselves in it; and upon these (which they called the principles of Whigs) they said that the government had been honourably conducted since the Revolution, and the nation would never be at peace till they were again establisht on the same basis.

In the mean time the disposition to libel and inveigle seemed to have gone beyond all bounds. The apprehension of peace, the Scots, and Scottified administration, afforded such subjects of abuse to the pretended patriots, that ministry resolved at last to make an example of one of them by way of deterring the rest from such licentiousness. For this purpose the paper called the North Briton was made choice of, which, in language much superior to any other political work of the time, had abused the king, the ministry, and the Scots, in an extravagant manner. One particular paper (No. xlv.) was deemed by those in power to be actionable; and Mr Wilkes, member of parliament for Aylesbury, was supposed to be the author. A warrant was therefore granted for apprehending the author, publishers, &c. of this performance, but without mentioning Wilkes's name. In consequence of this, however, three messengers entered his house on the night between the 29th and 30th of April 1763, with an intention to seize him. He objected, however, to the legality of the warrant, because his name was not mentioned in it, and likewise to the lateness of the hour; and on threatening the messengers with violence, they thought proper to retire for that night. Next morning he was apprehended without making any resistance, though some violence was necessary to get him into a hackney-coach, which carried him before the secretaries of state for examination.

On the first intimation of Mr Wilkes's being in custody, application was made for a habeas corpus; but as this could not be sued out till four in the afternoon, several of his friends desired admittance to him, which was peremptorily refused on pretence of an order from the secretaries of state. This order, however, though repeatedly demanded, could not be produced, or at least was not so; on which account the gentlemen, conceiving that they were not obliged to pay any regard to messengers acting only by a verbal commission, entered the place where he was without farther question.

This illegal step was quickly followed by several others. Mr Wilkes's house was searched, and his papers seized in his absence; and though it was certain that a habeas corpus was now obtained, he was nevertheless committed to the Tower. Here not only his friends, but even several noblemen and gentlemen of the first distinction, were denied access; nor was his own brother allowed to see him more than others. On the third day of May he was brought before the court of common pleas, where he made a most patriotic speech, setting forth the love he had for his majesty, the bad conduct of ministry, not forgetting his own particular grievances, and that he had been treated "worse than a Scotch rebel." His case being learnedly argued by several eminent lawyers, he was remanded to the Tower for three days; after which he was ordered to be brought up, that the affair might be finally settled.

Next day Lord Temple received a letter from Secretary Egremont, informing him, that the king judged it improper that Mr Wilkes should continue any longer a colonel of the Buckinghamshire militia; and soon after Temple himself was removed from being lieutenant of that county. Mr Wilkes then being brought to Westminster-hall at the time appointed, made another flaming speech; after which the judges took his case into consideration. Their opinion was, that the warrant of a secretary of state was in no respect superior to that of a common justice of peace; and on the whole, that Mr Wilkes's commitment was illegal. It was likewise determined, that his privilege as a member of parliament was infringed: this could not be forfeited but by treason, felony, or breach of the peace; none of which was imputed to him; for a libel, even though it had been proved, had only a tendency to disturb the peace, without any actual breach of it. Thus it was resolved to discharge him; but, before he quitted the court, a gentleman of eminence in the profession of the law stood up and acquainted the judges, that he had just received a note from the attorney and solicitor general, intreating his lordship not to give Mr Wilkes leave to depart till they came, which would be instantly, as they had something to offer against his plea of privilege. This motion, however, being rejected, the prisoner was set at liberty.

Mr Wilkes had no sooner regained his freedom than he showed himself resolved to make all the advantage he could of the errors committed by the ministry, and to excite as general a ferment as possible. For this purpose he wrote a very impudent letter to the earls of Egremont and Halifax, informing them, that his house had been robbed, and that the stolen goods were in the possession of one or both of their lordships, insisting upon immediate restitution. This letter was printed, and many thousand copies of it dispersed; soon after which an answer by the two noblemen was published in the newspapers, in which they informed him of the true cause of the seizure of his papers, that his majesty had ordered him to be prosecuted by the attorney-general, and that such of his papers as did not lead to a proof of his guilt should be restored. This was quickly succeeded by a reply, but the correspondence ceased on the part of their lordships. Mr Wilkes, however, erected a printing-press in his own house, where he advertised the proceedings of the administration, with all the original papers, at the price of a guinea. The North Briton now again made its appearance; the popular party were elated beyond measure with their success; those who had suffered by general warrants fought redress at law, and commonly obtained damages far beyond not only their real sufferings, but even beyond their most sanguine expectations. During the whole summer, the minds of the people were kept in continual agitation by political pamphlets and libels of various kinds, while the affair of general warrants so engrossed the general attention, that by the time the parliament sat down, November 15, 1763, scarce any other subject of conversation could be started in company.

On the meeting of parliament his majesty mentioned in his speech the attempts that had been made to ingage against divide the people; and before the addresses could be him in par made in return, a message was sent to the commons, informing them of the supposed offence of Mr Wilkes, and of the proceedings against him, the exceptionable paper being also laid before the house. After warm debates, the North Briton was deemed a false, scandalous, and seditious libel, tending to excite traitorous insurrections, &c. This was followed by another, that the privilege of parliament does not extend to the writing and publishing of seditious libels, nor ought to obstruct the ordinary course of the laws in the speedy and effectual prosecution of so heinous and dangerous an offence. It did not, however, pass the house of commons without a vigorous opposition, and seventeen members of the upper house protested against it.

The North Briton, No. xlv. being condemned, as already mentioned, was ordered to be burnt by the hangman; but this could not be done without great opposing the fission from the mob. The executioner, constables, officers, and even the chief persons concerned, were pelted with filth and dirt, and some of them insulted in the grossest manner. Mr Harley, one of the sheriffs and member of parliament for London, was wounded by a billet taken from the fire; the staves of the constables were broken, and the whole officers and executioner driven off the field; while the remains of the paper were carried off in triumph from the flames, and in return a large jack-boot was burnt at Temple-bar, while the half-burnt North Briton was displayed amidst the acclamations of the populace.

Mr Wilkes, in the mean time, determined to make the best use of the victory he had already gained, and therefore commenced a prosecution in the court of common pleas against Robert Wood, Esq., the undersecretary of state, for seizing his papers. The cause papers was determined in his favour, and Wood condemned in 1000l. damages, with full costs of suit.

The prosecution with which Mr Wilkes had been threatened was now carried on with great vigour; but in the mean time, having grossly affronted Samuel Martin, Esq., member for Camelford, by his abusive language in the North Briton, he was by that gentleman challenged, and dangerously wounded in the belly with a pistol-bullet. While he lay ill of his wound, the house of commons put off his trial from time to time; but beginning at last to suspect that there was some collusion betwixt him and his physician, they enjoined Dr Heberden, and Mr Hawkins an eminent surgeon, to attend him, and report his case. Mr Wilkes, however, did not think proper to admit Britain. admit a visit from these gentlemen; but soon after took a journey to France to visit his daughter, who, as he gave out, lay dangerously ill at Paris.

The commons having now lost all patience, and being certified that he had refused to admit the physician and surgeon sent by them, proceeded against him in his absence. The evidence appearing quite satisfactory, he was expelled the house, and a prosecution afterwards commenced against him before the house of lords, on account of an obscene and blasphemous pamphlet, in which he had mentioned a reverend and learned bishop in a most shameful manner. The event of all was, that, failing to appear to answer the charges against him, he was outlawed, which, it was then supposed, would for ever consign his patriotism to oblivion.

The extreme severity shown to Mr Wilkes did not at all extinguish the spirit of the party. A general infatuation in favour of licentious and abusive writings seemed to have taken place; and to publish libels of this kind without the least regard to truth or justice was called liberty. At the very time that Mr Wilkes was found guilty of publishing the infamous pamphlet above mentioned, the common council of London presented their thanks to the city representatives for their zealous and spirited endeavours to assert the rights and liberties of the subject, "by their laudable attempt to obtain a reasonable and parliamentary declaration, That a general warrant for apprehending and seizing the authors, printers, and publishers of a fictitious libel, together with their papers, is not warranted by law." Their gratitude they showed to lord chief justice Pratt, for his decision in Wilkes's affair, by presenting him with the freedom of the city, and desiring him to fit for his picture to be placed in Guildhall. These extravagant proceedings, however, did not pass without strong opposition, and were considered by the sober part as highly unjust and improper, as well as indecent.

The violent clamours which had been excited and still continued, though in a less violent degree, did not prevent administration from paying that attention to the exigencies of the nation which its present situation undoubtedly required. The practice of franking blank covers to go free per post to any part of Great Britain or Ireland, had arisen to an incredible height, and greatly prejudiced the revenue. The hands of members of parliament were not only counterfeited, but the covers publicly sold without the least scruple; and besides this, the clerks of the post office claimed a privilege of franking, which extended even farther than that of the members of the house; the latter being restricted to a certain weight, but the former denying that they were subject to any restriction of this kind. The matter, however, was attended with considerable difficulty when it came to be examined in the house of commons. It was found, that though the vast increase of franks was detrimental to one branch of the revenue, it was serviceable to another by the immense consumption of stamps it occasioned; but at last the following act was passed as an effectual remedy, viz. That from the 1st of May 1764, no letters or packets should be exempted from postage, except such as were sent to or from the king; or such as, not exceeding two ounces in weight, should be signed by a member of either house, the whole of the superscription being in his own handwriting; or such as should be directed to members of parliament, or other persons specified in the act. It was likewise enacted, that printed votes and proceedings in parliament, sent without covers, or in covers open at the sides, and only signed on the outside by a member, should go free, though such packets were liable to be searched; and to give the greater force to these regulations, it was made felony and transportation for seven years to forge a frank. At this time it was proved, that the annual postage of letters sent free would amount to 70,000l., and that the profits accruing to the clerks of the post-office amounted to between 800l. and 1,700l. each.

Other plans for augmenting the revenue were that for settling the island of St John, and for the sale of the lately acquired American islands. The former was Island of St John, and proposed by the earl of Egremont, who presented a memorial to his majesty on the subject. In this he demanded a grant of the whole island of St John's, in the gulf of St Lawrence, to hold the same in fee of the crown for ever; specifying particularly the various divisions, government, &c.; but for reasons unknown, the plan was never put into execution. The sale of the conquered lands took place in March, 1764. These were particularly the islands of Grenada, the Grenadines, Dominica, St Vincent, and Tobago. Sixpence an acre was to be paid as a quit rent for cleared lands, and a penny a foot for ground-rent of tenements in towns, and sixpence an acre for fields; but no person was to purchase more than 300 acres in Dominica, or 500 in the other islands.

One of the most remarkable transactions of this year was the renewal of the charter of the bank, for which the charter paid the sum of 1,100,000l. into the exchequer as a present to the public, besides the advancing a million to government upon exchequer bills. Another affair, however, was the consideration of methods to raise a revenue upon the American colonies. This had been formerly proposed to Sir Robert Walpole; but that prudent minister wisely declined to enter into such a dangerous affair, laying, that he would leave the taxation of the colonies to those who came after him in office. The reason given for such a proceeding was the defraying the necessary charges of defending them; which though extremely reasonable in itself, was done in such a manner as excited a flame not to be extinguished but by the total loss of the authority of the parent state. Before this time, indeed, hints had been thrown out, that it was not impossible for the colonists to withdraw their dependence on Britain; and some disputes had taken place betwixt the different provinces, which were quieted only by the fear of the French, and seemed to prognosticate no good. It was thought proper therefore now, when the colonies were not only secured but extended, to make the experiment whether they would be obedient or not. They contained more than two millions of people, and it was evidently necessary to raise a revenue from such a numerous body. Some thought it might be dangerous to provoke them; but to this it was replied by administration, that the danger must increase by forbearance; and as taxation was indispensible, the sooner the experiment was made the better. The fatal trial being thus determined... ned, an act was passed for preventing smuggling, so that the duties laid on the American trade might come into the hands of government. At this time an illicit trade was carried on betwixt the British and Spanish colonies, which seemed to bid defiance to all law and regulation; and was no less disagreeable to the Spanish than to the British court. In some respects, however, the suppression of this was very inconvenient, and even intolerable to the colonists; for as the balance of trade with Britain was against them, it was impossible they could procure any specie except by trading with the Spaniards, by whom they were paid for their goods in gold and silver. This, and another act requiring them to pay certain duties in cash, was probably the reason of that excessive resentment shown by the Americans to government, and their absolute refusal to submit to the stamp-act which was also passed this year.

The augmentation of the revenue being the principal object of administration at this time, the suppression of smuggling at home, as well as in America, was taken into consideration. Though the great number of cutters and other vessels fitted out by government for this purpose had produced very salutary effects, the Isle of Man, which belonged to the duke of Athol, and was not subject to the customhouse laws, lay so conveniently for the purposes of smuggling, that the utmost vigilance of government was not sufficient to suppress it. The event was a treaty betwixt government and the duke, by which the latter, for a sum of money, ceded all the sovereignty in the island he could claim, and cutters were placed on the coasts and in the harbours of the island as in other places of the kingdom.

This disposition to augment the revenue by all possible methods, seems to have served to keep up the general opinion of the oppressive and arbitrary measures about to be pursued by government. The ill humour of the British patriots still continued; and the stamp bills were received in America with the utmost indignation. The arguments for and against American taxation are now of no importance; and the particulars of their opposition are related under the article United States of AMERICA. Here we shall only take notice, that the opposition of the colonists proved very distressing to the mother-country, on account of the vast sums they owed. At this time they were indebted to the merchants of London four millions sterling; and so ready were the latter to give them credit, that some of the American legislatures passed acts against incurring such credit for the future. A petition on the subject was presented to the house of commons; but as it denied the parliamentary right of taxation, it was not allowed to be read. It was then proposed, on the part of administration, that the agents should join in a petition to the house for their being heard by counsel in behalf of their respective colonies against the tax. The agents, however, not thinking themselves empowered to grant such a petition, the negotiation was broken off, and matters went on in America as we have elsewhere related.

In other respects, the ministry took such steps as were undeniably proper for supporting the honour and dignity of the nation. Some encroachments having been made by the French and Spaniards, such remonstrances were made to their respective courts, that satisfaction was quickly made; and though every trifle was sufficient to open the mouths of the popular party, it was impossible as yet to find any just cause of complaint. The disposition to tumult and insurrection, however, seems to have been now very general. The Insurrection of the silk-weavers residing in Spitalfields being disturbed for want of employment, which they supposed to proceed from the clandestine importation of French silks, laid their case before his majesty in the year 1764, who graciously promised them relief. The sufferers were relieved by the bounty of the public; but this seemed to render the matter worse, by confirming them in habits of indolence and idleness. At the same time a bill, which was supposed to tend to their relief, being thrown out, they began to assemble in vast numbers, which, gradually increasing, are said to have amounted at least to 50,000; several disorders were committed, and it was not without the assistance of the soldiery, and the utmost vigilance of the magistrates, that the riot could be suppressed.

During this insurrection, the ferment betwixt the court and popular parties continued with unabated vigour. The ministers were still attacked in numberless publications, and accused as being merely dependents and substitutes to the earl of Bute; nor could the utmost care on the part either of that nobleman or the ministers blunt the shafts of calumny and misrepresentation. An accident, however, now produced a considerable revolution at court, though it had very little effect in calming the minds of the people. This was an illness with which the king was seized in the beginning of the year, which filled the public with apprehensions, and produced a bill for settling the affairs of the kingdom in case of the crown falling into the hands of a minor. In settling this bill, ministers were said to have behaved with very little respect to the princess dowager of Wales, and industriously to have excluded her from a share of the government. These changes of proceedings were thought in a great measure to have alienated the affection of his majesty from the ministry, who had hitherto been in great favour: Nor did their subsequent conduct show them to be at all desirous of regaining what they had lost. They now contrived to have the earl of Bute's brother turned out of a very lucrative post which he enjoyed in Scotland, and in which he had never given the least cause of complaint. A step of this kind could not be agreeable to his majesty, nor could it recommend them to the popular party in England, who always manifested a perfect indifference as to what passed in Scotland. On this occasion Lord Chatham is said to have been solicited again to accept the office which he had formerly filled to much to the satisfaction of the nation, and to have declined it. A new ministry, however, was soon formed, at the recommendation of the duke of Cumberland. The new duke of Grafton and the honourable Mr Conway, brother to the earl of Hertford, were appointed secretaries of state, the marquis of Rockingham first lord of the exchequer, and Mr Dowdell chancellor and under-treasurer of the exchequer. The office of lord privy seal was conferred on the duke of Newcastle, and all other places were filled with men not only of known integrity, but such as were agreeable to the people. These changes, however, were not yet able to give satisfaction. The opinion that affairs were still manage-

Vol. IV. Part II. The clamour against Lord Bute still kept up.

Death of his royal highness the duke of Cumberland.

Arguments for and against the stamp act.

It is repealed.

But at the same time another was made, declaring the right of parliament not only to tax the colonies, but to bind them in all cases whatever.

The repeal of the stamp act occasioned universal joy throughout both in Britain and America, though, as parliament is not inflicted upon their right of taxation, which the opposite party denied, matters were still as far from any real accommodation as ever. This ill humour of the Americans was soon after augmented by the duties laid upon glafs, painters colours, and tea, imported into their country, while at home the dearth of provisions, and some improper steps taken by ministry to remedy the evil, kept up the general outcry against them. A general disposition to tumult and riot still continued; and unhappily the civil power now seemed to lose its force, and a general anarchy, under the name of liberty, to be approaching.

In this state of affairs administration were once more disturbed by the appearance of Mr Wilkes, who had returned from his exile, and on the dissolution of parliament in 1768, though an outlaw, stood candidate for the city of London. He was received by the populace with loud acclamations, and several merchants and people of large property espoused his cause, and a subscription was entered into for the payment of his debts. He failed, however, in his design of representing the city of London, but instantly declared himself a candidate for Middlesex. The tumults and riots which now took place were innumerable; and such was the animosity betwixt the two parties, that a civil war seemed to be threatened. Our limits will not allow of any particular detail of these transactions. It will be sufficient to take notice, that on a legal trial the outlawry of Mr Wilkes was reversed, and he was condemned for his offences to pay a fine of £1000l. and to be imprisoned for twelve months. Being idolized by the people, however, and powerfully supported, he was repeatedly chosen member for Middlesex, and as often rejected by the house of commons. The tumults on this occasion were not always ended without bloodshed; and the interposition of the military was construed by the patriots as an indication of a design to establish ministerial authority by the most barbarous methods. In short, the behaviour of the people of England and America was at this time so very much alike, that both seemed to be actuated by one spirit, and the rage of the English patriots undoubtedly contributed to confirm the colonists in their disobedience.

The dissensions which had so long prevailed in the British kingdom did not pass unnoticed by the other European powers, particularly the French and Spaniards. Both had applied themselves with assiduity to the creation of their marine; and many began to prognosticate an attack from one or other or both of these nations. The Spaniards first showed an inclination to come to a rupture with Britain. The subject in dispute was a settlement formed on Falkland's islands near the southern extremity of the American continent. A scheme of this kind had been thought of as early as the reign of Charles II. but it was not till after Lord Anson's voyage that much attention had been paid to it. In the printed account of it, his lordship showed the danger incurred by our navigators through the treachery of the Portuguese in Brazil; and that it was a matter of the greatest importance to discover discover some place more to the southward, where ships might be supplied with necessaries for their voyage round Cape Horn; and, among others, he pointed out Falkland's islands as eligible for this purpose. When at the head of the admiralty his lordship also forwarded the scheme as much as possible; and some preparations were made for putting it in execution: but as it met with opposition at home, and gave offence to the court of Madrid, it was laid aside till the year 1764, when it was revived by Lord Egmont. Commodore Byron being then sent out with proper necessaries, took possession of them in the name of his majesty, and represented them in a favourable light; while his successor, Captain McBrine, affirmed, that the soil was utterly incapable of cultivation, and the climate intolerable.

Be this as it will, the islands in question had attracted also the notice of the French. So low, however, had that nation been reduced by the late war, that no project of the kind could yet be put in execution at the public expense. M. Bougainville, therefore, with the assistance of his friends, undertook to form a settlement on Falkland's islands at their own risk. The scheme was put in execution in the beginning of the year 1764; and a settlement formed on the eastern part of the same island where Commodore Byron had established an English colony on the western side. His account of the country was still more favourable than that of the English commander; but as the project had been undertaken with a view to other discoveries and advantages, which probably did not turn out according to expectation, the French adventurers soon became weary of their new colony; to which also the displeasure of the Spaniards, who were greatly offended, did not a little contribute. M. Bougainville, therefore, being reimbursed in his expenses, and the French having given up every claim of discovery or right of possession, the Spaniards landed some troops in 1766, took possession of the fort built by the French, and changed the name of the harbour from Port Louis to Port Solidad.

In the year 1769, Captain Hunt of the Tamar frigate, happening to be on a cruise off Falkland's islands, fell in with a Spanish schooner which had been at Port Solidad. During all this time it is uncertain whether the British and Spanish settlers knew of one another or not. From the behaviour of Captain Hunt we should suppose that they did not; as he charged the commander of the schooner to depart from that coast, being the property of his Britannic majesty. The schooner, however, soon returned, bringing an officer from the governor of Buenos Ayres, who gave the like warning to Captain Hunt to depart from the coast, as belonging to the king of Spain. Some altercation ensued; but Captain Hunt, not choosing to carry matters to extremities, set sail for England, where he arrived in June 1770.

At the departure of Captain Hunt, two frigates were left at Falkland's islands. One of these was lost in a short time after; and on the 4th of June 1770, a Spanish frigate arrived at the English settlement named Port Egmont, with a number of guns and other warlike utensils for carrying on a regular siege. In three days, four other frigates arrived, laden in the same manner; so that the English commander, Captain Farmer, finding all resistance vain, was obliged to capitulate. The English were ordered to depart within a limited time, carrying with them what stores they could; and the Spanish commander declared himself answerable for what they should leave on the island. The time allowed them to remain at Port Egmont was to be determined by the governor; and for the greater security, the rudder was taken off from Captain Farmer's ship, and kept on shore till the appointed period; after which the frigate was permitted to depart, and in 70 days arrived at Portsmouth.

An insult to the British flag so audacious, seemed Parliamentary to render war inevitable unless proper reparation was very speedily made. It was accordingly mentioned in the speech from the throne, November 13, 1770; and this affair an immediate demand of satisfaction for the injury was promised, and that the necessary preparations for war, which had been begun should not be discontinued. The affairs of America were also taken notice of, where grounds of complaint still existed, notwithstanding the cessation of those combinations which had distressed the commerce of this country. These promises, with regard to the affairs of Falkland's islands, however, were far from giving general satisfaction. The speech, as the work of ministry, was most violently attacked by opposition; and an address in answer to it, it was said, would be an eulogium on ministers, who did not deserve it. News had arrived, they said, from Falkland's islands in June, which sufficiently demonstrated the designs of Spain; and Gibraltar and Minorca were left open to the attacks of that power, without any preparation being made on our part to resist them. The whole conduct of the ministry was said to be pusillanimous; and the love of peace, which was given out as the reason of their unwillingness to resent the injury, was treated with contempt.

A motion was now made in both houses for an inquiry into the conduct of the Spaniards on this occasion, and that all the papers and letters relative to it should be laid before parliament. The demand, however, was opposed by ministry, who insisted that the laws of negotiation precluded the idea of exposing any letters or papers sent in confidence while the negotiation was depending; and they asserted that the king of Spain had disavowed the conduct of his officer, and promised satisfaction. It would have been rash, they said, to proceed to extremities betwixt the two crowns, when perhaps the officer only was to blame; but if, after remonstrance, the court of Spain refused satisfaction, we were then authorized to force that justice which was refused in an amicable manner.

Some time before this, Mr Harris, the English minister at the court of Madrid, dispatched a letter to Lord Weymouth, informing him that a ship had arrived from Buenos Ayres, with an account of the intended expedition against Port Egmont, the number of men to be employed, and the time fixed for its departure; at the same time that it was affected by Prince Mafra, the Spanish ambassador, that he had every reason to believe that the governor of Buenos Ayres had employed force at Port Egmont without any orders; and hoped that, by disavowing this proceeding, he might prevent any misunderstanding betwixt the two kingdoms. To this his lordship replied in a spirited manner, asking, among other things, Whether the prince had any orders to disfavor the proceedings of the governor? And, on his reply in the negative, a formal disavowal was demanded. After some time, his lordship was informed that the prince had orders to disavow any particular orders given to M. Bucarelli, the governor of Buenos Ayres, and at the same time to say, that he had acted agreeably to his general instructions and oath as governor; that the island should be restored; and that it was expected the king of Britain would, on his part, disavow the conduct of Captain Hunt, whose menace had induced the governor to act as he did.

This reply did not by any means prove agreeable; and soon after the conduct of the court of Spain became so suspicious, that Mr Harris was ordered to quit the court of Madrid; and the correspondence between Prince Maestranz and the court of England was no longer continued. About this time Lord Weymouth resigned his office, and was succeeded by the earl of Rochford; and the affair of Falkland's islands was no longer openly spoken of. On the sitting down of the parliament, January 22, 1771, however, it was again brought before the house, and the declaration of the Spanish ambassador, with Rochford's acceptance, were announced. Prince Maestranz then disavowed, in the name of his master, the violence used at Port Egmont; to the restitution of which he agreed, and hoped that this restitution should be looked upon as ample satisfaction, and at the same time as not affecting the question concerning the prior sovereignty of the islands. This produced a new demand for copies of all papers, letters, and declarations of every kind relating to Falkland's islands: but though it was now seemingly complied with, the opposite party affirmed that it was still only in part; for besides a chasm of near two months, during which time there was no account whatever, none of the copies of the claims or representations made by the court of Spain since the first settlement of the islands were given up. Thus a suspicion was produced, that the concealment of these papers, and the deficiencies in the order of their dates, might proceed from some misconduct during the periods in question; and which administration was willing to conceal from the world. To these objections it was replied, that every paper which could be found in the several offices had been presented; and that if there had been any correspondence between the two courts of which no notice was taken in them, it must have been verbal; but, at any rate, there were papers sufficient to enable the house to determine the propriety or impropriety of their conduct throughout the whole transaction; for every thing decisive or explicit was in writing, and every writing was laid before them.

All these excuses, however, could not yet satisfy opposition. It was reported, and generally believed, that France had interfered in the affair; in consequence of which, a motion was made to address his majesty for information whether any such interference had taken place, and of what nature it was, or in what manner it had been conducted. The minister denied that there had been any such interference: but it was insisted that this was insufficient; that the word of the king was requisite, as that of the minister could not be satisfactory, even supposing him to be upright. It did not, however, appear that any correspondence in writing had taken place betwixt the two courts: and when the minister was asked, whether France had ever interposed as mediator? he answered, that England "had not employed France in that capacity; but that the word interposed was of a meaning too vague for direct explanation; and it was unusual to demand verbal negotiations, while papers were laid before them: That as all Europe had an eye to the compromising of differences betwixt states, it was not to be supposed that France would be altogether silent; but nothing (says he) dishonourable has ever passed." Opposition still insisted that they had a right to have an account of verbal negotiations as well as others; and that if this right was given up, a minister had no more to do, when he wished to promote an indifferent measure, than to conduct it by verbal correspondence. The motion, however, was lost by a great majority in both houses.

This manner of deciding the question was so far from allaying the general ferment, that it rendered it much more difficult. The transaction was considered as entirely different from the manner graceful to the British nation: nor were all the arguments that could be used by the ministerial party in any affair of degree sufficient to overthrow the general opinion.

The restitution of the island was thought to be an adequate recompense for the affront that had been offered; and the objections to it were urged on a motion for an address to return thanks for the communication of the Spanish declaration, and to testify their satisfaction with the redress that had been obtained. This address was not carried without considerable difficulty, and produced a protest from 19 peers. On the part of Spain, however, every part of the agreement was ostensibly fulfilled; Port Egmont was restored, and the British once more took possession of it, though it was in a short time after evacuated, according to a private agreement, as was suspected, between the ministry and the court of Spain: but of this no evidence ever appeared to the public.

In other respects, the greatest discontent raged throughout the kingdom. A fire which happened at Portsmouth in the year 1770 excited numberless jealousies, and was by some imputed to our enemies on the continent. The affair of the Middlesex election was never forgotten; and notwithstanding many repulses, the city of London still ventured to present new petitions to the throne. In one presented this year by Mr Beckford, the lord mayor at that time, they lamented the heavy displeasure under which they seemed to have fallen with his majesty, and renewed a petition, frequently presented before, concerning a dissolution of parliament. This, however, met with a very unfavourable answer: his majesty informed the lord mayor, that his sentiments on that subject continued unchanged; and that "he should ill deserve the title of Father of his people, should he suffer himself to be prevailed on to make such a use of his prerogative as he could not but think inconsistent with the interest, and dangerous to the constitution, of the kingdom." Mr Beckford, so far from being disheartened by this answer, that able speech he demanded leave to speak to the king: which being obtained, he made a speech of considerable length, and concluded with telling his majesty, that "whoever had already dared, or should hereafter endeavour, by false insinuations and suggestions, to alienate his majesty's affections from his loyal subjects in general, and the city of London in particular, was an enemy to his majesty's person and family, a violator of the public peace," peace, and a betrayer of our happy constitution as it was established at the glorious revolution." To this no answer was made, though it gave great offence; and when Mr Beckford went afterwards to St James's with an address on the queen's safe delivery of a princess, he was told, that "as his lordship had thought fit to speak to his majesty after his answer to the late remonstrance; as it was unwise, his majesty desired that nothing of the kind might happen for the future."

This behaviour of Mr Beckford was by many of the court-party censured in an extreme degree, as indecent, unprecedented, impudent, and little short of high treason; while, on the other hand, he was on the same account raised to the highest pinnacle of popular favour. He did not long, however, enjoy the applause of the people, dying within a short time after he made the celebrated speech above mentioned, and his death was reckoned an irreparable loss to the whole party. Several other petitions were presented on the subject of popular grievances; but the perpetual neglect with which they were treated at last brought that mode of application into disuse. A new subject of contention, however, now offered itself. The navy was in a bad condition, and the sailors everywhere avoided the service. Towards the end of August 16 ships of the line were ready to put to sea; but the legality of press warrants being questioned, the manning of them became a matter of great difficulty. The new lord mayor, Barts Crofty, refused to back the warrants; which proved a vexatious matter to the ministry. They were further provoked by the unbounded liberty to which the press had been carried; and the mode of proceeding against some libellers had produced many complaints regarding the powers of the attorney-general. He had filed informations and carried on prosecutions, *ex officio*, without going through the forms observed in all other cases.—"This (it was said by the patriotic party) was inconsistent with the nature of a free government. No power can be more dangerous to private liberty, nor to the virtue or principles of him who enjoys it. The attorney acts under a minister, and his sense of duty must be very strong, or his independence very thoroughly secured by contentment, if he is at no time tempted to swerve from the laws of conscience and equity. It is in his power to give what name he pleases to a paper, and call it seditious or treasonable; then, without the interference of a jury, he proceeds to try the offender; who, though he may be acquitted, may nevertheless be ruined by the expenses attending its justification." Examples were cited on this occasion of very flagrant oppression and injustice from this very power: the laws, it was said, were become changeable at the pleasure of a judge; and the liberty of a subject was taken from him whenever he became obnoxious to his superiors. As these proceedings had therefore been the cause of very general complaint, a motion was made in the house of commons to bring in a bill for explaining and amending an act of the 4th and 5th of William and Mary to prevent invidious informations, and for the more easy reversal of outlawries in the court of king's bench. This motion was rejected by a great majority; the ministerial party urging, that the power of the attorney-general was the same that ever it had been, and founded on common law. The abuse of power was no argument against the legal exercise of it; it was dangerous to overthrow established customs; the actions of the attorney-general were cognizable by parliament, which controul must for ever prevent a licentious exertion of his power, &c.

These arguments, however, even with the rejection of the motion, did not put an end to the disputes concerning this head. The courts of justice themselves were at this time held up in a very defpicable light, on account of some late decisions which had been deemed contrary to law and usual practice. By these the judges had assumed a power of determining whether a paper was a libel or not; and the business of the jury was confined to the determination of the fact regarding its publication; and thus it was said to have appeared that the judges had it in their power to punish a man who had been found guilty of publishing a paper, whether seditious or not. Lord Chatham, in a speech on the Middlesex election, took occasion to mention these abuses; and was answered by Lord Mansfield, who looked upon himself to be particularly pointed at. The former, however, was so little convinced by his answer, that he drew from it an additional confirmation of his own arguments; and moved that a day should be appointed for taking into consideration the conduct of the judges; in which he was ably seconded by the late lord chancellor. A committee was accordingly moved for on December 6th 1770, to inquire into the matter; but after much debate, was rejected by 184 to 76. The affair, however, did not yet seem to be terminated. Lord Mansfield gave notice next day, that on Monday he would communicate to the house of lords a matter of the utmost importance; but when that day came, he produced nothing but a paper containing the case of Woodfall the printer as tried in the court of king's bench, that whoever pleaded might read or take copies of it. This was looked upon as exceedingly frivolous, and greatly disappointed the expectations of the whole house. His lordship was asked, whether he meant that the paper should be entered on the journals of the house or not? To which he answered, that he had no such intention, but only that it should be left in the hands of the clerk; on which the affair would probably have been overlooked altogether, had not the late lord chancellor, who all along strongly supported the motion, stood up to accuse Lord Mansfield, from the very paper to which he appealed, of a practice repugnant to the law of England. Hence he took occasion to propose some queries relative to the power of juries, and challenged his antagonist to a debate either at that time or soon after. But this method of proceeding was complained of as too precipitate, and an excuse was likewise made for not assigning a day for the debate at any other time; so that the matter soon sunk into oblivion. It was, however, loudly talked of without doors; and the judges, who had already fallen much in the estimation of the people, now became much more obnoxious. Pamphlets were printed containing the most severe accusations; comparisons were made betwixt some of the law lords and their predecessors, and even the print shops were filled with ridiculous and satirical pictures.

An accident which took place soon after contributed butted also greatly to lessen the character not only of the ministerial party, but even that of both houses of parliament taken collectively, in the eyes of the vulgar, to an extreme degree; and indeed it must be owned that nothing could be more derogatory to the honour of the first assembly of the nation, or to that of the individuals who composed it. A motion was made on the 20th of December 1770 by the duke of Manchester, that an address be presented to his majesty, that he would be graciously pleased to give orders for quickening our preparations for defence in the West Indies and in the Mediterranean; and particularly for securing the ports of Gibraltar and Minorca. But while his grace was decanting on the negligence of ministry in leaving ports of such importance in a defenceless state, he was suddenly interrupted by Lord Gower, who insisted on having the house immediately cleared of all but those who had a right to sit there.

"When motions (said he) are thus brought in by surprise, and without the knowledge of the house as to their contents, it is impossible but such things may be spoken as are improper for the general ear; especially as the enemy may have spies in the house, in order to convey secret intelligence, and expose the nakedness of our positions." His lordship was answered by the duke of Richmond, who complained of the interruption given to the duke of Manchester as a proceeding both irregular and injudicious. This produced a considerable degree of altercation; and the cry of "Clear the house!" resounded from all quarters. Several members attempted to speak, but finding it impossible, and piqued at this shameful behaviour, 18 or 19 of them left the house in a body.

The members of the house of commons then present of the house were not only commanded to depart, but some of the commoners went personally to the bar, and insisted on their affronted, leaving the house immediately. These unfortunate members alleged in excuse, that they attended with a misunderstanding, and were there in the discharge of their duty; but this availed nothing: they were peremptorily ordered to withdraw till their message should be delivered; and after going through the usual forms, were turned out of doors amidst the greatest tumult and uproar. In the mean time the lords, who had just left the house of peers, had gone to the lower house, where they were listening to the debates, when the commons, who had been turned out of the house of lords, arrived full of indignation, and making loud complaints of the affront they had received. This was reflected by turning out indiscriminately all the spectators; among whom were the 18 peers just mentioned, who were thus shut out from both houses. The affair terminated in a misunderstanding between the two houses, which continued during the whole session. Sixteen lords joined in a protest; and in the warmest terms censured the treatment they had met with, as well as the unprecedented behaviour of administration, who had thus attempted to suppress the freedom of argument, and render the conduct of the house an object of censure and ridicule to the whole world.

After the discussion of the affair of Falkland's islands in the manner already related, a most unheard of instance of corruption was laid before parliament in the borough of New Shoreham in Sussex. The contest was occasioned by the returning officer, Mr Roberts, having returned a candidate with only 37 votes, when the other had 87; and on bringing him to trial for this strange proceeding, the following scene of villany was laid open. A great number of the freemen of the borough had formed themselves into a society called the Christian Society or Club; but instead of keeping up the character indicated by this title, it was clearly proved by the returning officer, who formerly belonged to it, that it was employed only for the purposes of venality. A select committee of the members were appointed to sell the borough to the highest bidder. The committee men never appeared at elections themselves, but gave orders to the rest, and directed them how to vote; and after the election was over, shared the profits among themselves. Though all this was clearly proved, the returning officer was dismissed with only a reprimand from the speaker of the house of commons, for having trespassed upon the forms to be factoredly observed by a returning officer. A more severe punishment, however, was reserved for the borough, and those wretches who had assumed the name of the Christian Club. A motion for an inquiry being carried unanimously, a bill was brought in to incapacitate 81 freemen of this borough, whose names were mentioned, from ever voting at parliamentary elections; and, for the more effectually preventing bribery and corruption, the attorney-general was ordered to prosecute the committee belonging to the Christian Club: the members were allowed counsel; and many different opinions were offered regarding the mode of punishment. Some were mercifully inclined only to reprimand them, while others proposed to disfranchise the borough; however, the bill for incapacitation was passed at length, though it did not receive the royal assent till the last day of the session.

The unbounded licentiousness of the press now called the attention of parliament, though the evil appeared in a manner incapable of being checked. At this time neither rank nor character were any security against the voice of calumny from one party or other; and indeed it was hard to say on what side the most intemperate violence appeared. The ministry, however, provoked by a long course of opposition, made the loudest complaints of the freedoms taken with their names; while it was retorted by opposition, that the abuse from one quarter was as great as from the other. Some members of the house of commons complained that their speeches had been misrepresented in the papers, and endeavoured to put a stop to the practice of printing them. It was now considered as a matter contrary to the standing order of the house to print the speeches of the members of parliament at all; and Countess of a motion for calling two of the principal printers to the house of account was carried by a considerable majority. The commons printers, however, did not attend the summons of the messenger; and a final order for their appearance was directed to be left at their houses, and declared to be sufficient notice when left at their houses. The disobedience of the printers on this occasion was undoubtedly heightened by the favour they hoped to obtain from the popular party; and indeed it was not without the most severe animadversions that the ministry were able to carry their motions against them. This opposition increased by its being farther moved that that they should be taken into custody by the sergeant at arms for contempt of the orders of the house. The temper and disposition of the people towards the house was now objected, and the great impropriety of adding to their alarms by any unnecessary stretch of the executive power; but the majority urged the necessity of preserving the dignity of the house, and putting an end to those excessive freedoms which had been taken with its members. The sergeant at arms next complained, that not being able to meet with the printers at their houses, he had been treated with indignity by their servants; on which a royal proclamation was issued for apprehending Wheble and Thomson, the two obnoxious printers, with a reward of £50 annexed. But in the mean time fix other printers, who had rendered themselves equally obnoxious on a similar account, were ordered to attend the house, though the motion was not carried without great opposition, during which time the house divided between 20 and 30 times. Some of the delinquents were reprimanded at the bar, and one who did not attend was ordered to be taken into custody for contempt. Wheble being apprehended in consequence of the proclamation, was carried before Mr Alderman Wilkes, by whom he was discharged. To this magistrate it appeared that Mr Wheble had been apprehended in direct violation of his rights as an Englishman, as well as of the chartered privileges of a citizen of London; which opinion he declared in a letter to the earl of Halifax, one of the secretaries of state. Thomson was discharged in the same manner; but the captors received certificates from the magistrates, in order to obtain the promised rewards. J. Miller, one of the six who had refused to attend, was taken into custody from his own house by the messenger of the house of commons. On this he sent for a constable, and was carried along with the messenger before the lord mayor, and Aldermen Wilkes and Oliver, at the mansion-house. The lord mayor refused to deliver up the printer and messenger at the request of the sergeant at arms; and after some disputes the messenger was committed to prison, as he had been accused by Millar of assault and false imprisonment, and the sergeant had refused to find bail; however, he was immediately released upon the bail being given.

By this affront not only the majority but many of the popular party also were greatly irritated; however, the members in opposition took care to lay all the blame on the absurd conduct of administration with regard to the Middlesex election; in consequence of which they had incurred such a general odium, that the people thwarted every measure proposed by them, and eluded and despised their power on every occasion. The lord mayor was ordered to attend the house next day; at which time he pleaded that he had acted in no manner of way inconsistent with the duties of his office; as, by an oath which he took when entering upon it, he was bound to preserve the franchises of the city, and his conduct was farther to be vindicated from the terms of the city charters, as recognized by act of parliament. It was then moved that he should be allowed counsel; the question appearing to belong to the lawyers, as his lordship did not pretend to deny the privileges of the house, though he contended for an exemption from that privilege by virtue of charters and an act of parliament. This motion, however, was overruled, it being insisted that no counsel could ever be permitted against the privileges of the house. This refusal of counsel took its rise from a transaction in the reign of Henry VIII. and was now pleaded as the custom of parliament. Some proposed that the lord mayor should be heard by counsel, provided the privilege of the house was not affected; but it was considered as absurd to the last degree, that his lordship should be heard by counsel on every point except the very one in question. At the same time a motion was carried, that the lord mayor's clerk should attend with the book of minutes; and notwithstanding all opposition, he was obliged to expunge out of it the recognition of Whittem the messenger. This was followed by a resolution that there should be no more proceedings at law in the case; a great altercation ensued, and several of the minority at last left the house in the utmost rage.

Though it was now one o'clock in the morning, the ministerial party were so ardent in the prosecution of their victory, that they refused to adjourn; proceeding now to the trial of Mr Oliver, who, as well as against the lord mayor, was far from expelling any sorrow Oliver for what he had done. Some proposed to censure his conduct, others were for expulsion; but when it was proposed to send him to the Tower, the utmost confusion and mutual reproach took place; some members declared that they would accompany him to the place of his confinement; others left the house, while the ministry used their utmost endeavours to persuade him into some kind of apology or concession for what he had done; but finding that to no purpose, they at last carried the motion for his imprisonment, and he was committed accordingly. Ample amends, however, were made for this punishment by the unbounded popular applause heaped on both the lord mayor and alderman on this occasion, and which indeed threatened very serious consequences. Some days after the commitment of Mr Oliver, when the lord mayor attended at the house of commons, several very alarming insults were offered to many of the members, particularly Lord North; who on this occasion lost his hat, and narrowly escaped with his life. Some of the members of the minority interposed, and expostulated with the mob on the impropriety of their conduct, by which means all further disturbance was prevented; and had it not been for this timely interference, it is supposed that the fray would not have ended without much bloodshed.

After the confusion was in some measure dispelled, the debates concerning the lord mayor again took place. Many arguments were brought against proceeding farther in the matter; but, being disregarded, the minority members left the house. His lordship refused the favour offered him of being committed to the custody of the sergeant at arms, upon which it was resolved to commit him to the Tower; the motion for this purpose being carried by 200 against 39. Mr Wilkes, on being ordered to attend, wrote a letter addressed to the speaker of the house, in which he obliquely served, that no mention had been made of his being a member; and that if his seat in parliament, to which he had been duly elected, was to be granted him, he would attend and justify his conduct. Administration, however, BRITAIN

The many affronts and indignities which administration had of late been obliged to put up with now rendered it absolutely necessary to fall upon some method to show that their authority was not altogether lost.

For this purpose a committee was appointed by ballot of the house of commons to inquire into the reason why there had been so many obstructions to the authority of the house of commons.

This committee having sat from the 28th of March to the 30th of April, at last gave in the following report. "Your committee beg leave to observe, that in the diligent search they have made in the journals, they have not been able to find an instance that any court or magistrate has presumed to commit, during the sitting of parliament, an officer of the house for executing the orders of the house. They further beg leave to observe, that they have not been able to find, that there ever has been an instance wherein this house has suffered any person, committed by order of this house, to be discharged, during the same sittings, by any authority whatever, without again committing such persons. As therefore, with regard to J. Millar, who was delivered from the custody of the messenger by the lord mayor, who for the said offence is now under the censure of the house, it appears to your committee, that it highly concerns the dignity and power of the house to maintain its authority in this instance, by retaking the said J. Millar; the committee recommend to the consideration of the house, whether it may not be expedient that the house should order that the said J. Millar should again be taken into custody of the sergeant at arms; and that his deputy or deputies be strictly enjoined to call upon the magistrates, officers of the peace, and other persons, who by the speaker's warrant are required to be aiding and assisting him in the execution thereof, for such assistance as the said sergeant, his deputy or deputies, shall find necessary, to enable him or them to take into custody the said J. Miller."

Nothing could have been more imprudent than the urging with such violence a contest against such contemptible adversaries; and in which they were finally baffled. What they intended for punishment really afforded the criminals matter of triumph and exultation. Every honour that the city of London could bestow was conferred upon the magistrates, while the complaints and execrations of the people at large became louder than ever. Every step taken about this time by administration seemed calculated to add to the public ill humour. Towards the end of the session a bill was brought in "for enabling certain persons to enclose and embank part of the river Thames, adjoining to Durham-yard, Salisbury-street, Cecil-street, and Beaufort-buildings in the county of Middlesex." This bill was opposed, as appearing contrary to the ancient rights and privileges of the city of London; but was easily carried through both houses, though it produced a protest in the upper house; and a few days before the rising of the session, the city of London petitioned against it. In this petition it was complained of as a violent and unjust transaction; totally unprecedented; being an invasion of the property which the city claimed in the foal or bed of the river. It was afterwards complained of in a remonstrance, as an infringement of the rights of the people, and urged as a reason for the dissolution of parliament.

The only other transaction of moment during this East India session related to the East India Company. It was now proposed to raise 2000 men in England for the service of the company, the officers to be appointed by the king, and to be paid by the company. But after much speculation, it was rejected as unconstitutional and dangerous to keep an armed force in the kingdom which was not paid by government; and that, however inconsiderable the number proposed was at present, it might soon be increased on any frivolous pretence. It was likewise urged, that it would prove an obstruction to the recruiting service for our own army, on account of the superior advantages of enlisting in the company's service. The advocates for the bill urged the inconvenience of sending out a sufficient number of men annually to recruit the Indian forces; and that, unless parliament should adhere to the promise they formerly made of afflicting the company in recruiting, they would be daily exposed to vast loss and expense from the tricks of recruiting parties. The session rose on the 8th of May. In the speech from the throne, it was observed, that the satisfaction obtained from his Catholic majesty for the injury done this kingdom, and the proofs of the pacific disposition which the courts of France and Spain had given by laying aside their armaments, enabled us to reduce our forces by sea and land. The zeal manifested by parliament could not fail to convince the world of its affectionate attachment to the crown and regard to the interests of the country. His majesty's endeavours were promised to put an end to the troubles which still prevailed in some parts of the continent; thanks were given to the commons for the unanimous cheerfulness, and public spirit with which they had granted the supplies; and an apology was made for the extraordinary demands which had been made. The speech concluded with advising the members to use their best endeavours, in their respective stations and counties, to render the national happiness complete, by discouraging needless suspicions and domestic disturbances. His majesty had no other objects, and could have no other interests, than to reign in the hearts of a free and happy people; and it was his earnest wish that his subjects might not be prevented, by mistakes or animosities among themselves, from enjoying the happiness they had in their power.

The many defeats that had been received by opposition during this and the foregoing sessions now began to discourage them from proceeding such lengths in the cause of patriotism as they had formerly done. Many of them had also lost much of their popularity by taking an active part against the printers; and as every motion had been carried in favour of administration by nearly two to one, a general discouragement and languor began to take place among the popular party. The only gainers indeed by the late contentions were the city magistrates and printers who had been punished by the house of commons. On the rising of the parliament, when the lord mayor and aldermen were released... released from the Tower, they were welcomed by every mark of congratulation. The city was illuminated; and the mob, as usual, took vengeance on the refractory by breaking their windows. A committee was even appointed to carry on a prosecution against the speaker of the house of commons; but as this did not seem likely to afford any redress, they determined once more to have recourse to the throne. Accordingly, on the 16th of July 1771, another petition and remonstrance was presented, the subjects of which were the embankments on the Thames, the proceedings against the magistrates; and a speedy dissolution of parliament was requested. But this met with an unfavourable answer as before. His majesty replied, that he was ready to put an end to the real grievances of his faithful subjects; but he was sorry to find that a part of them still renewed requests which he had repeatedly refused to comply with.

In the speech from the throne, when the parliament met, January 21, 1772, his majesty observed, that the performance of the king of Spain's engagements, and the behaviour of the other European powers, promised a continuance of peace; and though the necessity of keeping up a respectable naval force was evident, yet no extraordinary aid for that purpose would be necessary; and he concluded with recommending the most vigilant and active attention to the concerns of the country, with an assurance of the interposition of the crown to remedy abuses or supply defects. Little dispute was made about the addressees in answer to this speech, though an ample subject of altercation very soon occurred. This was a motion made by administration, intimating the necessity of raising 25,000 seamen for the service of the current year; it being always necessary, they said, for us to preserve a superiority to the French in the East Indies, which had not been the case since they sent a considerable fleet thither. "It was equally necessary (they added) to preserve the present strength of the West Indies unimpaired; as the Spaniards knew the importance of our settlements there too well not to make an attack upon them first if ever a rupture should take place. Twenty of the best ships in the navy were also now employed as guard-ships, and wanted nothing but men to fit them for actual service."

A declaration of this kind, coming immediately after the assurances of peace that had been given from the throne, was said to be a contradiction; that the peace establishment would thus be augmented till we were overburdened by it; 300,000 would thus be added to the national expenses; and as the same augmentation might every year be made on similar pretences, we should thus be obliged to submit to the hardships of war in time of a profound peace. If the assurance of peace from the throne were well founded, the force in the East Indies was already too great; if, on the contrary, a war was at hand, it would be too small notwithstanding the proposed augmentation; and the same way Jamaica was likely to suffer from the inferiority.

These remonstrances were by no means sufficient to put a stop to any measure which had at this time been suggested by administration. The question for the augmentation was carried without a division; after which the subject of religion came to be discussed.

This was occasioned by the general tendency to Arianism or Socinianism, which had for some time prevailed to a great degree, and had at last infected the enlightened church in such a manner, that the subscription to her standards was reckoned intolerable by many of the clergy. Meetings had been frequently held by the discontented members, in order to consider of some mode of relief; and in the beginning of February 1772, Petition about 250 of them, with several professors of law and gainful subjects, joined in a petition to the house of commons, expressing their dissatisfaction with subscription to any human forms, and praying for relief. In this petition they asserted, that they held certain rights and privileges from God alone, without being subject to any other authority; such as the exercise of their own reason and judgment, by which they were instructed and confirmed in their belief of the Christian religion, as contained in the Holy Scriptures. They accounted it a blessing to live under a government which maintained the sufficiency of the Scriptures to instruct in all things necessary to salvation. Hence they concluded, that they had a right from nature, as well as from the principles of the reformed religion, to judge for themselves what was or was not contained in the Scriptures. From this invaluable privilege, however, they found themselves in a great measure precluded by the laws relative to subscription; by which they were enjoined to acknowledge certain articles and confessions of faith framed by fallible men as entirely agreeable to Scripture. They prayed therefore to be relieved from such an imposition, and to be restored to their undoubted right of interpreting Scripture for themselves, without being bound by any human explanation of it, or being required to acknowledge by subscription or declaration the truth of any formulary of religious faith and doctrine whatever, excepting the Holy Scripture itself.

The affair of subscription they looked upon to be not only a grievance to themselves, but an encroachment on their rights as men and members of a Protestant establishment, as well as a great hinderance to the spreading of the Christian religion, tending to discourage further inquiry into the true sense of Scripture, to divide communions, and to cause a mutual dislike between fellow Protestants; giving occasion for unbelievers to reproach and vilify the clergy, by representing them as guilty of prevarication, and of accommodating their faith to lucrative views and political considerations. It afforded also to Papists, and others disaffected to the religious establishment of the church of England, an occasion of reflecting upon it as inconsistent, and authorizing doubtful and precarious doctrines, at the same time that the Scripture alone was acknowledged to be certain and sufficient for salvation. It had likewise a tendency to divide the clergy among themselves; subjecting one part, who affirmed their privilege as Protestants, to be reviled both from the pulpit and the press, by another who seemed to judge the articles they had subscribed to be of equal authority with the Scripture itself; and, lastly, it occasioned scruples and embarrassments of conscience to those who were about to enter into the ministry, or prevented the cheerful exercise of it to those who were already entered. By reason of these embarrassments, the clerical part of the petitioners found themselves under der great difficulties, being obliged in some sense to join with the adversaries of revelation, in supposing the one true sense of Scripture to be expressed in the present established system of faith; or else to incur the reproach of having deserted their subscription, &c., while such of the petitioners as had been educated with a view to the professions of civil law and physic could not but think it a great hardship to be obliged, as they all were in one of the universities, even at their first matriculation and admission, though at an age very improper for such important dispositions, to subscribe their assent to a variety of theological tenets, concerning which their private opinions could be of no consequence to the public, in order to entitle them to academical degrees in those faculties; more especially as the course of their studies and attention to their practice did not afford them leisure sufficient to examine how far these tenets were consonant to the word of God.

This petition was presented by Sir William Meredith, who, along with the other members who favoured the cause, enforced it by many arguments drawn from the principles of toleration. They maintained also that nothing but hypocrisy and prevarication could arise from obliging men to subscribe what they did not believe; that the repeal of the laws for subscription would prevent the increase of dissenters, so very conspicuous at this time, and incline many of them to return to the church. The articles themselves were said to have been compiled in a hurry; that they contained doctrines highly controversial; and that this restraint on the consciences of men was of all others the greatest hardship. The majority of parliament, however, were found inimical to the petition, though some who opposed it at present wished for time to consider it more deliberately, or to refer it to a committee of the clergy. By the rest it was urged, that the matter of the petition was a violent infraction of the laws of the English religion; and that if this was granted, another would soon follow against the liturgy. The conduct of many of the petitioners, instead of being founded in any regard for religion, had its origin in hypocrisy and dissoluteness, and certainly proceeded in many instances from a disbelief of the Trinity, and of the divinity of our Saviour. The complaints of men were to be disregarded when they wished to profit by the emoluments of the church without subscribing to its laws; besides, the king was bound by his coronation oath to continue the church-government without alteration. It was likewise urged, that if people were to be restrained by no other article than an assent to the truth of the scriptures, the church would soon be overrun with impiety. Many had already founded blasphemous tenets on the right of private opinion; and though it could not be denied that every man has this right for himself, yet none has a right to obtrude his singularities upon others; and if any of the clergy found the delicacy of their consciences affected after they had accepted of benefices, they were welcome to leave them.

Some of the more moderate opposers of the petition endeavoured to vindicate the character of the clergy from the imputations laid upon them; and contended that the legislature had a controlling power over the articles of the union, and confirmed their affections by mentioning the act against occasional conformity, as well as another against elective patronages, both of them passed since the union: and it seemed to be the general wish of the house that the professors of law and physic might be relieved from subscription, though they did not consider their share in the matter as of any great importance to the public. It was at last rejected, thrown out by a majority of near 150.

The rejection of the subscription bill was followed by that of a bill for quieting the possessions of his majesty's subjects from dormant claims of the church; after which the attention of parliament was called to one of the utmost importance, and which was introduced by a message from the king. This was the famous royal marriage-bill, occasioned by the marriage of the late duke of Cumberland with Mrs Horton, a widow lady, daughter of Lord Irnham, and sister to Colonel Luttrell, and that of the duke of Gloucester with the countess-dowager of Waldegrave. By the message it was recommended to both houses to take it into their consideration, whether it might not be expedient to supply the defects of the laws then in being, and by some new regulations more effectually to prevent the descendants of his late majesty (excepting the issue of the princesses who had married, or might hereafter marry, into foreign families) from marrying without the consent of his majesty, his heirs, and successors. In consequence of this a bill was brought in, declaring all such marriages, without the consent above mentioned, to be null and void. The descendants of his majesty, however, if above the age of 25 years, might marry without the royal consent, provided they gave intimation twelve months beforehand to the privy council, and no opposition to the match was made by parliament during that interval.

This bill met with the most violent and powerful opposition. The principal arguments against it were gained, expressed in two protests from the upper house, and were to the following purpose: 1. The doctrine that marriages in the royal family are of the highest importance to the state, and that therefore the kings of this realm have ever been trusted with the care thereof, is both absurd and unconstitutional; though it would from that period have the force of a parliamentary declaration. The immediate tendency of this was to create as many prerogatives to the crown as there are matters of importance in the state; and to extend them in a manner as vague and exceptionable as had ever been done in the most despotic period. 2. The enacting part of the bill had an inconvenient and impolitic extent; namely, to all the descendants of Geo. II. In process of time, that description might become very general, and comprehend a great number of people; and it was apprehended that it would be an intolerable grievance, for the marriages of so many subjects, perhaps dispersed among the various ranks of civil life, to be subject to the restrictions of this act; especially as the abettors of this doctrine had also maintained, that the care and approbation of the marriage also included the education and custody of the person. This extensive power might in time make many of the first families of the kingdom entirely dependent on the crown; and it was regretted that all endeavours to limit, in some degree, the generality of that description, had proved ineffectual. 3. The time of nonage for the royal family appeared to be improperly extended beyond... yond the limit of 21 years; a period which the wisdom of the constitution seems with great wisdom to have assigned to minority. 4. The deferring their marriage to the age of 26 might also be attended with other bad consequences, by driving them into a disorderly course of life, which ought to be particularly guarded against in those of such an exalted station. 5. The power given by this bill to a prince to marry after the age of 26, is totally defeated by the proviso which declares the consent of parliament to be ultimately necessary. Thus great difficulties must be laid on future parliaments, as their silence in such a case must imply a disapprobation of the king's refusal; and their concurrence with it might prove a perpetual prohibition from marriage to the party concerned. 6. The right of conferring a discretionary power of prohibiting all marriages, appears to be above the reach of any legislature whatever, as being contrary to the inherent rights of human nature; which, as they are not derived from, or held under, the sanction of any civil laws, cannot be taken away by them in any case whatever. The legislature no doubt has a right to prescribe rules to marriage as well as to every other kind of contract; but there is an essential difference between regulating the mode by which a right may be enjoyed, and establishing a principle which may tend entirely to annihilate that right. To disable a man during life from contracting marriage, or, which is the same thing, to make his power of contracting such marriage dependent neither on his own choice nor on any fixed rule of law, but on the arbitrary pleasure of any man, or set of men, is exceeding the power permitted by Divine Providence to human legislature, and directly contrary not only to the divine command, but also to the rights of domestic society and comfort, &c. 7. This bill has a natural tendency to produce a disputed title to the crown. If those who are affected by it are in power, they will easily procure a repeal of this act, and the confirmation of a marriage made contrary to it; and if they are not, it will at least be the source of the most dangerous faction that can exist in any country, viz., one attached to a pretender to the crown; whose claim, he may assert, has been set aside by no other authority than that of an act to which the legislature was not competent, as being contrary to the common rights of mankind. 8. The bill provides no security against the improper marriages of princes married into foreign families, and those of their issue: which may fall as materially affect the interest of this nation as the marriages of princes residing in the dominions of Great Britain. It provides no remedy against the improper marriage of the king reigning, though evidently the most important of all others to the public. It provides nothing against the indirect marriage of a prince of the blood, being regent at the age of 21; nor furnishes any remedy against his permitting such marriages to others of the blood-royal, being fully invested with the legal power for this purpose, without the assistance of council.

The answer to all these arguments was, that the inconveniences so much talked of were merely imaginary; and if the king should make any improper use of his authority, parliament had it either in their power to prevent the effect, or to punish the minister who advised it. The crown, it was said, was dishonoured by improper connexions, and many of the greatest national calamities have proceeded from improper alliances between the royal family and subjects; and that if, from after experience, we should find any material grievances ensue from this act, it could as easily be repealed at that time as thrown out now, and on better grounds. It was very rapidly carried through both houses; in the upper house by 93 to 26; and in the lower by 165 to 115.

Though the late decision concerning subscription to relief of the 39 articles did not seem to promise much success to dissenters to any innovations in religious matters, yet the case of proposed dissenting ministers was introduced soon after the diffusion of the royal marriage act; the advocates for it being encouraged to bring it forward chiefly on account of some favourable hints thrown out in the debates on the subscription bill. A petition was now presented by a great body of these people, praying to be relieved from the hardship of subscribing to the articles of a church to which they did not belong. This, however, was most violently opposed by the opponents of the former bill, though with very little success in the house of commons, where it was carried through by a prodigious majority. Here it was maintained that nothing can advance the true interest of religion so much as toleration; and if articles of subscription are necessary, it must only be for men destitute of principle, and who would, in compliance with ambition or avarice, as readily subscribe to one set of articles as another. If thus any of the fundamental doctrines of Christianity are impugned, there are abundance of laws in existence to correct the impiety. The dissenters have indeed altered some of their original forms and doctrines, but that only in matters of indifference. It is the effect of learning, leisure, and refinement, to give men many opportunities of altering established forms. This has been the case formerly, and always will be. The dissenters have long been virtually exempted from this subscription; and yet the piety and decency of many of them, particularly in Scotland and Ireland, where no such laws are in being, sufficiently show that men, whose minds are steadfast in the purity of religion, will not be confined nor influenced by laws of human invention. But though the dissenters enjoy full liberty by connivance at present, where is their security against the sudden attacks of malice and envy, which may be backed by the sanction of law? Every neglect of a law by connivance is an additional proof of the necessity of abrogating that law: and liberty is but an empty name, where it is enjoyed by an oversight only, as it were, of our superiors. In the house of lords, however, the bill was rejected by a majority of 70. Here the doctrine of universal toleration was strenuously opposed, as well as the great danger set forth to which the church of England would be exposed by departing from the laws which guarded its privileges. The dissenters, it was said, had great cause to be satisfied with the favour they enjoyed by connivance; and the laws were only kept in record as a necessary curb, lest in the degeneracy of a declining kingdom, religion should be destitute of protection against heresy and blasphemy.

The only other affairs of this session were some attempts at an inquiry into the affairs of the East India Company, which were now in a very critical situation. These, however, did not come under consideration till the next session, which took place November 26, 1772, when his majesty gave this situation of the affairs of the company as a reason why he had called them together sooner than usual. The continuance of the pacific disposition of other powers was mentioned, and satisfaction expressed that the continuance of peace had afforded an opportunity of reducing the naval establishment, though a great force must always be necessary for the defence of these kingdoms. Economy was promised with regard to the supplies, and it was recommended to take every method that could be devised to remedy the dearth of provisions.

The affairs of the East India Company took up the greatest part of the present session. It had been projected, as far back as the year 1667, when they were in a very flourishing condition, to bring them under the inspection of government, that the nation might share the immense wealth supposed to be enjoyed by the company. The design, however, did not succeed at that time, nor would it probably have been easily brought to bear, had not the affairs of the company been embarrassed by the bad conduct of their servants. During the last session a bill had been brought in for restraining the governor and council from all kind of trade, as well as for enlarging the power of the company over its servants. The bill, however, was rejected after the second reading, and indeed was thought to have been proposed only to introduce succeeding bills. The debates on the subject procured in a great measure the general belief of two points of much importance to the success of the scheme, viz., that the affairs of the East India Company were in a very bad situation, owing to the behaviour of its servants; and that the company was at any rate insufficient for the government of such extensive possessions; of consequence that there was an evident necessity of giving up the management of it to the crown. A motion was now made in parliament, by a gentleman unconnected with administration, for a select committee to inquire into the affairs of the company: but many reasons were urged against this appointment, particularly that the season was too far advanced for a business of such importance; that the committee, being a secret one, was not accountable for its conduct; and that as the minister would have it in his power to nominate the members of the committee, considerable partiality might on that account take place. The motion, however, was carried without a division; and the members were chosen by ballot.

The affairs of the East India Company proceeded from bad to worse during the recess. The treasury at home was quite exhausted; while bills to a vast amount drawn on Bengal were nearly due; which, with their debt to the bank and other public offices, along with the sum to be paid to government, reduced them almost to the brink of bankruptcy. They were therefore reduced to the expedient of borrowing a sum of money from administration: but their application was received with great indifference. The minister desired them to apply to parliament. The reports of the select committee, in the mean time, contrary to the promise of secrecy, were published, and gave the public no favourable opinion of the behaviour of the company's servants. On the meeting of parliament, the minister moved for another committee, under the title of the committee of secrecy, to consist of 13 persons, for taking into consideration the state of the company's affairs; which might thus undergo a full investigation without anything being known to the world, which had excited such indignation in the former case. The members of this new committee were also to be chosen by ballot; so that no objection could militate against them that did not militate with equal strength against the whole house. It was objected, that this mode of secret inquiry, by a small number, was unprecedented and unconstitutional; that the members would, in effect be nominated by the minister, and act under his direction; and that a free investigation by the whole parliament was essentially different from that by a secret committee. In the latter case, every information that the minister thought proper to conceal would be withheld; at any rate, a committee of secrecy is an evident absurdity; a committee can be no longer a secret than during the time it takes up for inquiry. Its proceedings must be laid before the public; and in case of unjust accounts, the parliament had no means of being undeceived. These reasons, however, were of no avail at present. The committee of secrecy was carried, as the other had been, without a division; and, as had been predicted, the members, though chosen by ballot, were almost all of them devoted to administration. The select committee was likewise revived, that they might be, as it was said, checks upon one another; so that between them the nation would have every requisite degree of information on the whole affair.

In a very short time after the appointment of the restraining secret committee, a report was given in, stating that the bill proposing company were in great distress for want of money; and led, as this was the case, a bill ought to be brought in for restraining them from sending out supervisors to India, a scheme which they had meditated at this time. The minister and his adherents enlarged greatly on the utility of this bill; which, they said, was highly expedient. It was the sincere wish of parliament to render them a great and glorious company: it was absolutely necessary for this purpose not to allow them to engage in an expensive commission, at a time when their affairs were so much embarrassed that they were obliged to apply to government for a loan. It was even doubted whether the company, without the sanction of parliamentary authority, had power to appoint a commission of this kind. On the other hand, the minister's proposal was said by opposition to be unconstitutional and insidious. The want of cash at present experienced by the East India Company was not of such great importance, their credit being then as fully established as ever. They had made choice of a set of men in whom they could confide; the many losses occasioned by their servants rendered the commission indispensible necessary; and the expense would be paid from the savings which must undoubtedly arise from so prudent a step. It was unreasonable, because the East India Company, or any other, are distressed, to allow them no opportunities of extricating themselves. The company could not be said to want respect for parliament; they had showed this already by delaying the departure of the commission till the inquiry begun by the house was finished; nor could they be wanting in respect to their own interest, character, and constitution; which they seemed to show by every possible mark of opposition to this bill. bill. Administration boasted of their intentions and their wishes to render this company great and glorious; but how could we expect greatness or glory to proceed from a quarter where it did not exist? The dignity of parliament was lessened, and its glory effaced, by the conduct of ministers, and the many wanton acts of authority lately committed. It was a curious method of rendering a company great and glorious to plunder the proprietors of immense sums of money by exorbitant grants, or by taking away their charters; for after this act it was plain that charters could no longer be depended upon. Two gentlemen belonging to the company, and then present in the house, offered to pledge themselves, that the commission of supervision should not be allowed to depart, until, from further report, a full knowledge of the company's affairs should be acquired. This, however, was instantly rejected, it being said to be defective in security; that the East India Company would not scruple to make an agreement of this kind today and break it tomorrow; which could only be prevented by an act of parliament, especially as the ministry had no motives for promoting this measure, but a regard for the welfare of the company, and a desire to restore its affairs to a better state.

Notwithstanding all the arguments used by administration in favour of this bill, however, the company were so far from thinking it to their advantage, that they used every endeavour to prevent it passing into a law. They petitioned; and some of their servants were examined in the house of commons, in order to show the necessity of supervisors being sent out, who might be qualified to reduce their affairs to some order by being on the spot, and enabled to curb the excesses of which the company's servants had too frequently been guilty. During this examination it appeared, that from the year 1765 to 1773 the expenses of the company had increased from 700,000l. to 1,700,000l. annually, and that government had received near two millions from the company every year; that they had immense profits in extraordinary, while the proprietors lost considerably of the dividend which the profits of their trade alone would have produced. In spite of all opposition, however, the bill for restraining the company from sending out any commission of supervision was carried by a majority of 153 to 28. In the house of lords it met with similar success, being carried by 26 to 6, though the minority thought proper to enter a protest. The reasons given against it in this protest were, that it took away from a great body corporate, and from several free subjects of this realm, the exercise of a legal franchise, without any legal cause of forfeiture assigned. The persons appointing the commissioners had by law a right to elect, and the persons chosen had a legal capacity of being elected. The supervisors had a full right vested in them agreeable to the powers and conditions of their appointment; but though no abuse was suggested, nor any delinquency charged upon them, those legal rights and capacities were taken away by a mere arbitrary act of power, the precedent for which leaves no sort of security to the subject for his liberties. The bill seemed likewise a manifest violation of the public faith. The charter of the East India Company was granted by the crown, authorized by act of parliament, and purchased for valuable considerations of money lent and paid. By this the company were allowed to manage their own affairs as they thought proper, and by persons of their own appointment; but by this bill the exercise of the power just mentioned was suspended for a time, and by grounding the supervision upon the actual interference of parliament with the affairs of the company, established a principle which might be used for perpetuating the restraint to an indefinite length of time. It is indeed difficult to settle the legal boundary of legislative power; but it is evident that parliament is as much bound as any individual to observe its own compacts; otherwise it is impossible to understand what is meant by public faith, or how public credit can subsist. It appeared by evidence upon oath at the bar of the house of lords, that the company had received assurances from their chairman and deputy chairman, that the appointment of a commission for superintending and regulating their affairs would be approved by administration; and it was extremely hard that they should be able to find no security for their charter privileges against those very ministers under whose sanction they had reason to believe they were all along acting. It was also the more incumbent on the company at present to give the most strict attention to their affairs, to enable them to answer the exorbitant demands of government; as it appeared from the witnesses at the bar, that its exactions amounted to more than the whole profit of the late acquisitions, and the trade ensuing from them; while the proprietors, who had spent so much, and so often risked their all for obtaining these acquisitions, had not been permitted even to divide so much as the profits of their former trade would have afforded.

The select committee now gave in their second report, containing a statement of the debt, credit, and effects of the company in England; beginning with an account of the cash in the company's treasury on the 1st day of December 1772, and containing a statement of all their debts and claims against them in every part of the world. Thus it appeared that the cash, credit, and effects of the company amounted to 6,307,299l. 10s. 6d., and their debts to 2,024,326l. 10s. 6d.; which being deducted from the above account of their effects, left a balance in favour of the company of 4,364,993l. 10s. 6d., without any valuation of the fortifications and buildings of the company abroad. The statement, however, was complained of as unfair; and satisfactory, it was said, that impartiality was not to be expected from a set of men who had it in their power to make what report they pleased for the interest of government measures; but the members protested their innocence; and administration insisted, that, until proof could be brought that the statement was unfair, the house was bound to adhere to it as just.

The business was revived after the holidays by an application from the company to government for a loan of the company of 1,500,000l. for four years, at four per cent. interest; with liberty of paying the same according to the abilities of the company, in payments of not less than 300,000l.; and that the company should not make a dividend of more than 6 per cent. until the loan should be reduced to 750,000l.; that then they might raise their dividend to 8 per cent, and after the whole loan... loan was discharged, that the surplus of the nett profits arising in England, above the laid dividend, would be appropriated in the payment of the company's bond debt, until it was reduced to £1,500,000. when the surplus profits should be equally divided between the public and the company. It was also requested, that the company should be released from the heavy penal interest incurred by the non-payment of money owing in consequence of the late acts for the indemnity on teas; and that they should be discharged from the annual payment of the £400,000. to the public for the remainder of the five years specified in the agreement. They farther requested, that the accounts of the Duanee revenues, of the charges of collection, expenses of Bengal, company's accounts of sales, &c. should be delivered annually to parliament, and that leave might be given to export teas free of all duty to America, and to foreign parts. This request was judged expedient to be granted, and the following resolutions were agreed to: "That the affairs of the East India Company are in such a state as to require the assistance of parliament; that a loan is necessary to reinstate the company's affairs; that the supply be granted; and that care be taken that the company be prevented from experiencing the like exigencies for the future." The two following motions were also founded upon the report of the secret committee, viz. That, supposing the public should advance a loan to the East India Company, it was the opinion of the committee that the dividend should be restrained to 6 per cent. until the payment of the sum advanced; and that the company be allowed to divide no more than 7 per cent. until their bond-debt be reduced to £1,500,000.

These several restrictions were judged proper by administration for the security of the public, and were such, they said, as every creditor has a right to make beforehand with a person who wishes to borrow money from him. The company, however, replied, that the restrictions were contrary to the proposals they had made, and void of foundation, as being built on the erroneous reports of the secret committee. The chairman of the company declared at a general court that the government had agreed, or would agree, to the proposed increase of dividend, before the participation of profits took place betwixt the government and company; the first lord of the treasury had told him so, and now wished to deny what he had said by using these expressions in private conversation, and when he did not consider the chairman as acting officially. But if this was the case, to what purpose did public men hold conversations, since they were afterwards to deny or forget what passed? Some time was also demanded to consider of these motions; but that being denied, the question was put and carried as ministry wished.

The next step was to deprive the company of their territorial right to the countries they possessed in the East Indies. This had been allowed them in the most explicit manner, as appears by some of the papers which passed between the French and English ministers during the negotiations for the treaty of Paris; from one of which papers the following is an extract: "Respecting those territorial acquisitions which the English East India Company have made in Asia, every dispute relative thereto must be settled by that company itself, the crown of England having no right to interfere in what is allowed to be the legal and exclusive property of a body corporate belonging to the English nation." This territorial right, however, was now denied. After reading the company's petition, Lord North told the house that it was the opinion of several great lawyers, that such territorial possessions as the subjects of any state shall acquire by conquest, are virtually the property of the state, and not of those individuals who acquire them. It was his opinion, however, that it would be more beneficial to the public and to the East India Company, to let the territorial acquisitions remain in the possession of the company for a limited time not exceeding six years, to commence from the agreement betwixt the public and the company. At the same time it was moved, that no participation of profits should take place betwixt the public and the company until after the repayment of £1,400,000. advanced to the company; and the reduction of the company's bond debt to £1,500,000. That, after the payment of the loan advanced to the company, and the reduction of their bond-debts to the sum specified, three-fourths of the nett surplus profits of the company at home, above the sum of 8 per cent. upon their capital stock, should be paid into the exchequer for the use of the public, and the remaining fourth be set apart either for reducing the company's bond debt, or for composing a fund for the discharging of any contingent exigencies the company might labour under.

These proceedings were exceedingly disagreeable to the company. They now presented a petition complaining of the injustice of demanding any further terms on account of a loan, after that loan was discharged. The limitations of the company's dividend to 7 per cent. after the discharge of the loan, until their bond-debt should be reduced to £1,500,000, seemed not to be founded upon any just calculation of their commercial profits; nor could it with reason be alleged that it was necessary either to their credit or that of the public to restrain them in such a manner. The additional dividend of 1 per cent. was an object of some consequence to the proprietors, but very little to the discharge of their debt to the public; and the hardships of being limited in this manner were exceedingly aggravated by the losses sustained, and the expenses they had incurred in acquiring and securing the territorial revenues in India, at the risk of their whole capital, while the public reaped such great advantages. The limitation of the company to a term not exceeding five years for the possession of their Indian territories they looked upon to be entirely arbitrary, as it might be construed into a final decision against the company respecting those territories to which they insisted that they had an undoubted right. Neither could they acquiesce in the resolutions by which three fourths of the surplus nett profits of the company at home, above the sum of 8 per cent. per annum upon their capital stock, should be paid into the exchequer for the use of the public, and the remainder be employed either in further reducing the company's bond debt, or for composing a fund to be set apart for the use of the company in case of extraordinary emergencies; such unheard-of disposal of their property without their consent not being warranted by the largest pretensions ever ver made against them. It was likewise subversive of all their rights and privileges, by denying them the disposal of their own property after their creditors were properly secured by law. Their petition concluded with afflicting ministers, that, rather than submit to these conditions, they desired that any claims against the possessions of the company might receive a legal decision; from which, whatever might be the event, they would at least have the satisfaction to know what they could call their own.

No regard being thrown to this petition, the motions were carried in favour of administration. To make some kind of recompense, however, it was agreed on their part, that as the company had a stock of teas amounting to about 17 millions of pounds in their warehouses, they should be allowed to export as much of it as they thought proper free of duty, and employ the money thence arising for the behoof of their own affairs.

This concession in favour of the East India Company proved in the event the loss of the American colonies; nor indeed could these arbitrary proceedings with such a considerable body tend to impress the minds of any part of the nation with ideas favourable to the views of administration. In other respects the minister abated nothing of the disposition he had from first to last thrown with regard to the company. On the 3d of May 1773 the following resolutions were laid down by him as the foundation of a bill for the establishing certain regulations for the better management of the East India Company, as well in India as in Europe. These were, 1. That the court of directors should in future be elected for four years; six members annually, but not to hold their seats longer than four years. 2. That no person should vote at the election of the directors who had not possessed their stock twelve months. 3. That the stock of qualification should for the future be 1000l. instead of 500l. 4. That the mayor's court of Calcutta should for the future be confined to small mercantile causes, to which its jurisdiction only extended before the territorial acquisitions. 5. That, instead of this court, thus taken away, a new one should be established, consisting of a chief justice and three puisne judges. 6. These judges to be appointed by the crown. 7. That a superiority be given to the presidency of Bengal over the other presidencies in India. Each of these resolutions was carried by a great majority. The salaries of the judges were fixed at 600l. each, and that of the chief justice at 800l. The governor of the council was to have 25,000l. annually, and the members of the council 10,000l. each. By the friends of the company, however, the bill was supposed to have a tendency to effect a total alteration in the company's constitution in England, as well as the administration of all its presidencies in Asia, in order to subject all their affairs, both at home and abroad, to the immediate power of the crown. No delinquency was charged, nor any specific ground of forfeiture assigned; yet by this bill more than 1200 freemen were to be disfranchised and deprived of any voice in the management of their property. By cutting off the 500l. stockholders, the proprietary would become more manageable by the crown; nor was there any security that the directors would be faithful to the interests of the company when they were no longer responsible to them for their actions. By the establishment of a general presidency over all the affairs of the company, and by the nomination of judges for India, government would in effect transfer the whole management of the affairs of the company to the crown, and the company would have no farther share in the business than to pay what salaries the crown thought fit to assign them. The proprietors of 500l. stock presented a petition, setting forth, that, by King William's charter granted to the tors of 500l. company, and repeatedly confirmed since that time, in consideration of many large sums repeatedly advanced by the company to the public, they were legally possessed of a right of voting at the election of directors, making of bye-laws, or in any other matter relating to the affairs and government of the company; but by a clause in this regulating bill they were deprived of this right, and that under a pretence of preventing the pernicious practice of splitting stock by collusive transfers; but so far were the proprietors from giving way to such practices, that in the year 1767 they petitioned parliament for an act, by which the several proprietors entitled to vote should be obliged to hold this qualification six months at least before the exercise of their right, afterwards extending the time to twelve months, rather than the act should fail of its intended effect. This proposed increase of the qualification of the voters, however, could not in any degree answer the end desired; for the splitting of stock being confined to such proprietors as held large quantities, they would find it an easy matter to place their stocks in the hands of half the number of persons, and thus extend their influence in a great and undue proportion; but if ever government conceived designs against the company, they would find it much easier to execute them, while the proprietors were few and opulent, than when they were numerous, and at the same time independent and possessed of moderate fortunes. This petition produced a motion in the house of commons, "That it does not appear that the proprietors of 500l. stock in the East India Company have been guilty of any delinquency in the exercise of their charter-rights according to the several acts of parliament made in their behalf." This, however, being rejected, their regulating bill passed in the house of commons by a majority of more than five to one. In the house of lords it passed by 74 to 17. The duke of Richmond moved for a conference with the house of commons; but this was refused. He then moved that copies of all the papers which had been laid before the commons should be laid before the lords also; but this being likewise refused, he joined six other members in a protest, the substance of which was, that the whole was a scheme of government to get the power and wealth of the company into their hands; pointing out at the same time the many particular infringements on public and private rights by passing the bill.

All this time inquiries went on by the select and secret committees; the affairs of the company were investigated from the year 1756, and many witnesses examined concerning them. A report was presented by General Burgoyne, containing many charges of secret cruelty and rapacity in the conduct of several gentlemen concerned in the management of the affairs of the company. the company; particularly with regard to the deposition of Surajah Dowlah in 1756. This was said to have been the origin of all the evils that had happened since that time. He insisted much on the treachery used in bringing about that revolution, and particularly the fictitious treaty with Omichund; exposing the conduct of Lord Clive, who had caused Admiral Watson's name to be affixed to that treaty, which the admiral had refused to sign in person*. He concluded with moving for the restitution of all the money received in presents or otherwise in India, while the receivers acted in a public capacity; and at last stated the following resolutions: "That all acquisitions made under the influence of a military force, or by treaty with foreign powers, do of right belong to the state; that to appropriate acquisitions obtained by such means is illegal; and that great sums of money had been obtained by such means from the sovereign princes in India." The general belief that many of the company's servants had acted in a most infamous manner, was at this time so strong, that the above resolutions were carried almost unanimously. Lord Clive defended himself by general protestations of innocence; which, however, gained but little credit, till he entered into a particular refutation of the charges against him. His friends were not of opinion that these were of an atrocious nature, and wished to excuse him by policy, necessity, &c., rather than load him with any great degree of guilt. The treaty with Omichund was justified by necessity. Some said, indeed, that as Omichund had the character of the most accomplished villain in Asia, an Englishman only wished to have a trial of skill with him. This severe sarcasm, however, was a mere piece of wit, without any solid foundation; for the crime, if any there was in that transaction, undoubtedly lay in the dethroning a sovereign prince by means of traitors, not the cheating of these traitors of their reward. Indeed, if once we admit treachery into our dealings at all, it is in vain to pretend any submission to the rules of justice; for we are already beyond its jurisdiction.

General Burgoyne now moved, "That Lord Clive, in consequence of the powers vested in him in India, had received at various times presents to the amount of £24,000 sterling, to the dishonour and detriment of the state;" but this being rejected after violent debates, the following was substituted: "That Lord Clive did, in so doing, abuse the power with which he was intrusted, to the evil example of the servants of the public." This also being rejected, another was added, "That Lord Clive, when he received the sum above mentioned, did at the same time render great and meritorious services to his country." Thus the matter was concluded, and the affairs of the company delivered into the hands of administration, who declared that their regard for its welfare was the sole motive for bringing about this revolution.

The affairs of the East India Company were succeeded by those of America. The ill humour occasioned by the taxes laid on that country has been already taken notice of. The stamp act had excited among them a spirit of industry, economy, and a desire of serving themselves with their own manufactures, which had never been forgotten. This was, at that time, as well as afterwards, imputed to wilfulness, or the discontent of a few, which would afterwards subside of itself, or be superseded by the voice of the majority; when things would of course revert to their old channel. The trifling tax on tea, however, which had not been repealed, and the allowance given to the company to export what quantities they pleased, now threw matters into a ferment not to be quelled by any means whatever. The various proceedings in America, the tumults, and subsequent war, are fully taken notice of under the article United States of AMERICA. Here it only remains to give an account of the manner in which the legislature and people of Great Britain were affected by these events. It has already been remarked, that ever since the conclusion of the peace in 1763 the disposition shown by government to augment the revenue, for which indeed there was at that time an evident necessity, had produced in the popular party of Great Britain a spirit very similar to that manifested by the Americans, though in an inferior degree; so that the patriots of Britain affected to consider the Americans as oppressed by government, and suffering in the same cause with themselves. The destruction of the tea at Boston and other places in America, however, considerably diminished the number of their friends, and made many of those who still adhered much less sanguine in their cause. The matter was announced to parliament by a special message from the throne. Lord North and the other ministers set forth the conduct of the colonists, particularly of the town of Boston, in a most atrocious light, and concluded that new government was perfectly justifiable in any measures they might think proper to redress the wrong, and inflict such punishment on the town as the enormity of the crime seemed to deserve. Opposition did not pretend to exculpate, though it was still attempted to excuse them, by deriving all the disturbances in that country from the arbitrary and absurd measures pursued and obstinately adhered to at home. This heavy charge the ministry evaded by drawing the attention of the house to the more important consideration, Whether the Americans were now to be dependent, or independent, on Great Britain? The Boston port-bill being then brought in, was carried, but not without considerable opposition, both within and without doors. A petition was first presented by Mr Bollan, agent for the town of Maffachuset's Bay, urging an act of petition to Queen Elizabeth for the security of the liberty of the colonies. This was presented before the bill had actually made its appearance; but so little regard was paid to it, that, during the very time it lay on the table, the bill was brought in by Lord North. After it had passed two readings, that gentleman presented another, desiring to be heard in behalf of the town of Boston, for the council of Maffachuset's Bay. This was absolutely refused; because, though Mr Bollan was agent for the colony, he was not for the corporation of the town of Boston. Neither could he be so for the council of Maffachuset's Bay; for as that was necessarily fluctuating, the body which had appointed him was now no longer existing. This appeared very inconsistent to many of the members, and produced a greater opposition in the house than would otherwise in all probability have ensued. A new petition quickly followed from the lord mayor, in the name of the natives and inhabitants of North America residing at that time. time in London. This was written in a more spirited style, and boldly insisted that the bill was illegal, unprecedented, unjust; and that, under such a precedent, no man or body of men in America could have a moment's security; the charge being brought by the enemies of the town, and the punishment inflicted without hearing them in their own defence, or even making them acquainted with the charge; and they concluded with these remarkable words, that "the attachment of America would not survive the justice of Britain." As little regard being paid to this as to the former petitions, and all proposals for a delay rejected, the bill passed both houses without a division; the minority, notwithstanding their opposition, not choosing to dissent publicly from the first step taken by government to reduce the disobedient colonies. That this obnoxious bill might not be sent to America without some mitigation, however, they proposed the repeal of the duty on tea laid on in 1767; but this was also rejected, probably from a vain expectation that the opposition of the Americans was that of a mere tumultuous mob, and that by showing a proper spirit and perseverance the ministry could not fail to come off victorious at last.

The extreme obstinacy shown by ministers, in this first instance, undoubtedly proved very prejudicial to their cause, not only by exasperating the Americans, but by rousing the indignation of minority, and making their opposition so violent and determined, that the Americans could not but conclude that they had a very strong party in their favour on this side of the Atlantic. This appeared in every subsequent transaction relating to the colonies. The bill for regulating the government of Massachusetts Bay did not pass without a protest, from which we shall only extract the following sentence: "This act, unexampled in the records of parliament, has been entered on the journals of this house as voted nemine dissentiente, and has been stated in the debate of this day to have been sent to the colonies as passed without a division in either house, and therefore as conveying the uncontroversied universal sense of the nation. The despair of making effectual opposition to an unjust measure has been construed into an approbation of it."

The like consequences ensued on passing the act for the impartial administration of justice. In the protest on this occasion the lords used the following expressions: "The bill amounts to a declaration, that the house knows no means of retaining the colonies in due obedience but by an army rendered independent of the ordinary course of law in the place where they are employed. A military force sufficient for governing upon this plan cannot be maintained without the inevitable ruin of the nation. This bill seems to be one of the many experiments towards the introduction of essential innovations into the government of this empire. The virtual indemnity provided by this bill for those who shall be indicted for murders committed under colour of office, can answer no other purpose. We consider that to be an indemnity which renders trial, and consequently punishment, impracticable. And trial is impracticable, when the very governor, under whose authority acts of violence may be committed, is impowered to send the instruments of that violence, to 3000 miles distance from the scene of their offence, beyond the reach of their prosecutor, and the local evidence which may tend to their conviction. The authority given by this bill to compel the transportation from America to Great Britain of any number of witnesses at the pleasure of the parties prosecuting and prosecuted, without any regard to their age, sex, health, circumstances, burdens, or duties, seems to us so extravagant in its principle, and so impracticable in its execution, as to confirm us farther in our opinion of the spirit which animates the whole system of the present American regulations."

A still greater opposition was made to the Quebec Debates on bill, inasmuch that, before it could be carried, the ministers were obliged to drop much of that high and aspiring tone to which they had accustomed themselves in talking of American affairs. The minority contended, that here, without any necessity pleaded, or even suggested, an arbitrary influence was extended by act of parliament to that province, furnishing a dangerous precedent, and an additional instance of the aversion which ministry bore to the rights of the people. They argued likewise in favour of the mode of trial by juries, and thought that the establishment of the Roman Catholic religion there gave it a preference over the Protestant, which was now only to be exercised by toleration. The people at large also were alarmed at the religious part of the bill, and it is not impossible that the suspicions conceived at this time might contribute in some measure to the dangerous insurrections of 1779 and 1780.

At the conclusion of the session his majesty expressed the greatest satisfaction at what had been done, and hopes of the good effects that would attend the new regulations. The reception they met with in America is related in its proper place; in Britain the people seemed to wait the event with indifference, but their bad success with the colonists furnished the minority with new matter of reproach to cast on administration. The parliament in the mean time was dissolved by proclamation, and a very short time allowed for the election of new members; so that if opposition at that time had any strength, they had not now time to exert it.

The new parliament met on the 30th of November Parliament-1774; when his majesty acquainted the houses that a most daring spirit of resistance still prevailed in America, notwithstanding the most proper means had been taken to prevent the mischiefs thence arising, and assured them that they might depend on a firm resolution to withstand every attempt to weaken or impair the supreme authority of this legislature over all the dominions of the crown. In answer to this speech the minority demanded a communication of all the letters, orders, and instructions, relating to American affairs; but this being overruled, and the address carried as a matter of form, American affairs were delayed, in spite of all opposition, till after the holidays. In the question on the address, the strength of administration was to that of their adversaries as 264 to 73.

In the beginning of 1775 the minority received a considerable accession of strength by the return of Lord Chatham, who, after long absence, again made his appearance in parliament. He now testified his disapprobation of the measures which had been pursued with regard to America in the warmest terms; moved for addressing the king to recall the troops from Boston; predicted, that if ministers went on in the way they had done for some time, they would make the crown not worth the king's wearing; that the kingdom was undone, &c. All his eloquence, however, proved at this time ineffectual; administration was determined upon forcing the Americans into subjection, and his motion was rejected by 68 to 18.

Lord North now presented the papers which had been called for by the minority; but lest the publication of particular names should prove detrimental to individuals, only such parts as administration thought proper for public inspection were laid before the house. This was complained of, but to no purpose; and the papers, in their mutilated state, were laid before a committee of the whole house. In the meantime petitions against coercive measures with America had been received from most of the trading companies of the kingdom: which, though highly displeasing to administration, could not be absolutely rejected, though it was fully determined not to yield to their requests in the smallest degree. A committee was therefore appointed to take them into consideration, which was not to take place until the American affairs were also considered. The reason given for this method of proceeding was, that the consideration of commercial matters ought not to interfere with those of the political kind: each of them being sufficiently embarrassing without any other. This delay of hearing these petitions was supposed to be an absolute rejection of them in effect; and so indeed it proved to be, the committee to which they were consigned being humorously called the committee of oblivion. The merchants of London, however, were determined not to give up the point until they had exerted themselves to the utmost. They drew up a paper in which they denied the distinction established by ministry. They affirmed that the connection between Great Britain and America was chiefly of a commercial nature, and that the manifold regulations adopted for the mutual prosperity of the colonies and of the mother-country formed the great political chain which united them to one another. Questions of commerce and policy, therefore, with regard to them, ought never to be divided, but examined jointly, and could never be thoroughly understood if considered in any other way.

This remonstrance was seconded by all the powers of opposition; but the truth was, that administration had already determined what line of conduct they were to follow, and therefore wished to hear as little as possible on the subject. "War (says Dr Andrews) was now the word: and notwithstanding no weightier reason could be given for not attending to what the merchants had to say, than this very determination, yet that was the very motive that impelled ministers to refuse them a hearing, lest they should make it appear how unwise it was to precipitate the nation into such a measure."

But though there is not the least reason to doubt that administration were now fully determined upon a war, and therefore wished to be troubled with as few objections as possible, they were by no means deficient in arguments for the defence of their own conduct. They alleged that the petitions so much recommended to the attention of the house were principally the work of a factious party. The advantages accruing from the American trade were owing to the dependent situation of the colonies, who now aimed at a superiority over Great Britain, or at least at shaking off entirely the superiority which the mother-country had till now exacted over them without the smallest complaint. It was the advantage of the merchants themselves that was consulted by maintaining that superiority; and the merchants themselves would be the first to feel the bad consequences of its being lost. War and its consequences are no doubt very terrible, but sometimes are necessary, to prevent greater evils. The greatest evil that can befall a trading nation is the loss of its commerce; and were the Americans to persist in their course at that time for a few years longer, this consequence must inevitably ensue.

It was besides insisted, that though administration were to yield the present contest, the warmest advocates for America could not pretend to say what would be the last of its demands. The Americans aimed in reality at the repeal of whatever appeared obnoxious to their immediate interest: But that and their real interest differed very much. The greatest political evil that could befall them was to be deprived of the political and commercial support they received from Great Britain; and to this they must ultimately submit, if they should ever succeed in the pursuit of that delusive phantom of independence which they now accosted their happiest situation. In short, administration insisted, not without a great show of reason, that the Americans were not to be reclaimed by concessions. Mercantile people, indeed, might imagine so, from the facility with which concessions would be made, and the speed with which tranquillity would be restored. But tranquillity procured in this manner would last no longer than till the colonies, unfettered by any regulations, perceived, or imagined they perceived, the benefit of dealing with other countries, and carried their own commodities wherever they thought proper. This was the point at which they incontestably aimed, whatever they might pretend to the contrary; for, notwithstanding the boasts they made of the vast business transacted with Britain, it was well known to arise from the immense credit they were indulged with there, and which they could not expect elsewhere.

The honour and character of the nation were now also said to be at stake. The British had often taken up arms for matters of less consequence; why then should they now hesitate in a case like the present, where honour and interest both called upon them for the most vigorous and speedy exertions? Formerly it was the custom of the merchants to second the wishes of ministry in this respect, instead of opposing them. The inconvenience of suspending their profits for a time must be submitted to, and their enemies would experience as many if not more of the same kind; and it would be unworthy of the character they had so long sustained, to yield to indignities for the sake of profit. The losses above mentioned, however, would be but trifling in comparison of those that would follow in time to come, should Britain from want of spirit give up the assertion of her just rights. This was a policy hitherto unknown in Britain, which had hitherto been noted for the ardour and celerity with which they were maintained.

The end of all this altercation was, that the motion in favour of the merchants petitions was rejected by 250 to 89. This point, however, was no sooner discussed, than a violent debate arose about the petition of congress to the king, which had been delivered, and by him referred to parliament. It was argued by administration, that no petition could be received from the continental congress, which was no legal body, and it would be admitting their legality to receive a petition from them; the general assemblies and their agents were the only lawful representatives of the colonies, and none else would be admitted. Opposition replied and argued as much as possible, but to no purpose; and, after an ineffectual struggle, they had the mortification to find that the petition was finally rejected by 218 to 68.

In the mean time a conciliatory plan was prepared by the earl of Chatham, which was presented on the 11th of February 1775. The intent of this bill, he said, was to settle the troubles in America, and to assert at the same time the supreme legislative authority and superintending power of Great Britain over her colonies. This was to be done by their acknowledging on their part the supremacy of the British legislature and the superintending power of parliament. No taxes were to be levied in America, but with the free consent of their assemblies. It asserted a right in the crown to keep and station a military force established by law in any part of its dominions; but declared, that it could not be legally employed to enforce implicit and unlawful submission. A congress might also be held, in order to recognize the supreme sovereignty of Great Britain over the colonies, and to settle, at the same time, an annual revenue upon the crown, disposable by parliament, and applicable to the exigencies of the nation. On complying with these conditions, the acts complained of by congress were to be suspended, with every other measure pointed out as a grievance, and the constitution of their government to remain as settled by their charters. This bill was, however, deemed at once totally inadmissible, on account of its alleged partiality to America, by the various concessions it enacted, and particularly by empowering the colonies to assemble in congress; a measure which, of all others, was at that time the most offensive, and supposed to be the most injurious to the British interest.

Lord Chatham was by no means deficient in arguments in support of his favourite plan; but these, though supported by all the powers of eloquence, proved unsuccessful; the proposal was ultimately rejected by 61 to 32. So determined were the majority in giving this an entire rejection, that it was not even permitted to lie upon the table; which, however, may be considered as a piece of indignity offered to that great man, proceeding rather from the indifference with which he had been received at court for some time, than from any real and thorough conviction of the inutility of the plan he proposed.

A new petition was next presented to the house of commons by the proprietors of estates in the West India islands: representing their alarm at the afflicting of the Americans, and their intended stoppage of trade with the British islands; the situation of which, they said, would be very calamitous, if the acts in question were not immediately repealed. The trade of these islands was at that time of the most extensive nature. All quarters of the globe were concerned in it; the returns centered in Britain, and were an immense addition to its opulence, inasmuch that the British property there amounted to no less than 30 millions sterling. But the West Indies, however wealthy, did not produce the necessaries of life in sufficient abundance for their inhabitants. Large importations were continually wanted, which could only be supplied from North America; and were they to be cut off from a communication with that continent, they would shortly be reduced to the utmost distress. Such was the substance of this petition; to which no more attention was paid than had been to the rest. To administration all petitions now appeared to be the contrivance of faction; and it was said, that however inconvenient the coercive measures might be, they ought not to be retarded by the consideration of any temporary losses. As it was necessary, however, to let the nation know the ultimate resolves of administration respecting America, it was at last done by Lord North in a long speech, in which the most remarkable circumstances relating to the dispute were enumerated. It was asserted, that universal fermentation, then prevailing in America, proceeded from the unwarrantable arts and practices used to dispose them against the ruling powers in Britain; and asserted, that, notwithstanding all their complaints, the public charges borne by individuals in America were, on the strictest computation, not more than 1 to 50, when compared with what was paid by individuals in England. Nothing, therefore, but a settled determination to quarrel with the parent state could induce the Americans to persist in their disobedience to the lawful injunctions laid upon them, which were neither injudicious nor oppressive; but on the contrary, framed with all possible lenity, and counterbalanced by advantages which were not possessed by Britain. It was therefore a spirit of resistance which animated America, and not a discontent at oppressions, which plainly had no existence. For this reason it was proposed to the house to send a greater force to America; and to pass a temporary act, suspending all the foreign trade of the different colonies of New England, and particularly the Newfoundland fishery, until they consented to acknowledge the supreme authority of the British legislature, &c., upon which these restrictions should be taken off, and their real grievances, if any such there were, redressed upon making proper application. New England, they said, was justly singled out upon this occasion, as being the most guilty of the whole. The others, as less faulty, it was hoped, would yield with less compulsion; but the question now was simply, Whether we would at once abandon all claims on the colonies, and instantly give up the advantages arising from our sovereignty, and the commerce dependent on it? or, Whether we should resort to the measures indispensably necessary to ensure both?

An address was now carried, which, in the ideas of the opposition, amounted to an absolute declaration of war, drew on the consequences, therefore, were painted out with the American utmost freedom, and some even denied the charge of papers. Rebellion fixed on the province of Massachusetts Bay. The people there, they said, had done nothing but what the constitution allowed; they had resisted arbitrary measures; and the examples so frequently set them at home were sufficient to justify their conduct.

The appellation of rebels, they said, was dangerous, and might better be spared; it would only serve to render them desperate, and inspire them with a determination to resist to the last, from an apprehension that their lives and properties were forfeited. This last consideration, however, was made very light of by administration. Great treas, they said, was laid upon the union of the colonies, but a very little time would show with how much impropriety. The principles on which they were associated were too self-denying to be supported by human nature, and were too inimical to the interest and feelings of individuals to bind them long together. In other respects this union of the colonies might be viewed with indifference, and even contempt. The natives of America, it was said, were no soldiers; they were averse to military discipline, and incapable of subordination; they were of a slothful and spiritless disposition; uncleanly, liable to sickness, and easily overcome by fatigue. Such people as these would never face a British army: and a very small force would be necessary to put an end to all their projects of independence.

There were the principal arguments for and against this address, which was carried by 296 to 106: but so important was the subject of it deemed by the minority, that a motion was made for recommitting it, on account of the consequences that would probably result from the prosecution of the measures recommended. A very long and violent debate ensued: the event of which was, that administration contended as usual for the necessity of enforcing obedience with fire and sword. The Americans, they said, were become incorrigible through forbearance; lenity was a subject of derision among them, and was imputed to imbecility and fear; they imagined themselves able to abolish the sovereignty of Britain in that country, and were now resolved to do it. It was therefore incumbent on every native of Britain in such a case to stand forth, and vindicate the interest and glory of his country; and it was the duty of parliament and ministry to call forth the whole spirit of the nation to a contest in which every thing dear to them, both in their public and private capacities, was so deeply concerned.

In this, and some former debates, the danger of being involved in foreign wars on account of the colonies had been insisted on; but this was looked upon by administration to be improbable. It was hardly to be imagined, they said, that foreign powers would behave in a manner so very impolitic as to encourage rebellions in other colonies, which might, in a very short time, become precedents for imitation in their own. The number of friends to government in America was likewise very much relied upon. A proper reinforcement to the troops already there would encourage those to declare themselves who were at present too timid to avow their sentiments: these, if duly supported, would be found to be no inconsiderable number; and when added to the forces stationed among them, would undoubtedly counterbalance the power of the malecontents. This project of arming the Americans against one another was reproved by opposition more than all the rest. The address itself was a measure replete with barbarity as well as imprudence; tending to put arms in the hands of every man throughout the continent who suspected the designs of the British administration, and to expose to ill usage and ruin every person who was known, or imagined, to be a friend to Great Britain. The Americans were said to aspire at independence; but if any thing could bring this about, it would be the conduct of ministry. The most obedient and loyal subjects cannot have patience for ever with a tyrannical government. They will undoubtedly rise at last and assert their rights; and those who style them rebels on that account ought to remember, that oppression not only produces but justifies resistance. It had always been believed by the Americans, without any contradiction from Britain, that internal taxation in America belonged to the assemblies of the colonies, and to them only. There were opinions in all nations, which the legislature would respect, while they produced no bad consequences. This opinion ought not therefore to have been attacked at such an improper season, after having been virtually recognized by the repeal of several acts, and approved by some of the most learned and intelligent people in the kingdom. It was the greatest misfortune that could befall a state, when its rulers endeavoured, without any apparent necessity, to alter the system and maxims of governing long adopted, and the utility of which had been confirmed by experience. This was, however, the case with Britain. The mildness and benignity which were wont to direct the measures of former ministers were now laid aside for severity and imperiousness; while implicit obedience was imposed upon the colonists, as the only condition by which they could purchase peace.

The aspersions of cowardice, so largely thrown upon the Americans by the ministerial party, did not pass unnoticed. It was observed, however, that were these ever so just, the very nature of their country would fight for them. By this alone our military enterprises would be retarded and impeded in a considerable degree; while the finances of war would undoubtedly be greatly relaxed, as the suspension of such a considerable commerce as that of our colonies could not fail to be severely felt.

Besides all this, the views and principles of ministers were attacked in the most violent manner. They were said to be reviving the old exploded doctrines of hereditary right and passive obedience.—They required the Americans to submit unconditionally to the will of Great Britain, for no other reason but because she was the parent state: but if no better reason could be produced, they could not be justly blamed for their disobedience. The ties between Great Britain and her colonies, however, were of a far more noble as well as more binding nature than even origin and consanguinity. These ties were the constitution transmitted from Britain, and the brotherly assistance hitherto afforded them by Englishmen; and which ought to render the name dear to them. While these ties remained unviolated, there was no room to complain of their behaviour; but they would never submit to despotic authority in Englishmen more than in any others. Such unwarrantable principles rendered it no longer a question, whether the measures of administration should be considered, but whether the ministers themselves ought not to be deprived of the power they exercised so unconstitutionally: constitutionally: And the question was not now between Great Britain and America, but, whether we should give up our colonies or our ministers.

Language of this kind excited the indignation of the ministerial party to a very high degree. They now charged minority in very plain terms, with the guilt of all that had happened. A factious republican spirit, they said, was gone forth; by which every person who wrote or spoke on the American cause was actuated; and which had not only induced the Americans to commence a rebellion against the parent state, but had filled the house with incendiaries. The final issue of the dispute was, that the recommitment of the address was lost by 288 to 199. The debates were the most violent that had ever been known in the British parliament; and so important was the subject reckoned, that not only the natives of Britain, but even the foreign ministers in London, watched the motions of administration with the utmost anxiety, as considering it a point which might probably give a new face to the affairs of all Europe.

All these victories of administration were not sufficient to prevent new enemies from starting up. Petitions had been preparing by the London merchants trading to America, and from those concerned in the West India trade, to be presented to the house of lords. This talk was undertaken by the marquis of Rockingham, but he was prevented by a previous motion in favour of the address. A long and violent debate, however, ensued concerning the necessity and propriety of receiving them. The papers on which the address had been founded were said to be partial and mutilated, for which reason the house ought to pay the greater regard to the representation of the merchants; whose testimony, as persons deeply and essentially interested in bringing truth to light, might be depended on with much greater safety. It was urged, that they earnestly desired to be heard before the house took any final determination with regard to America; a refusal would amount to a public declaration, that parliament was resolved to oppose the sense of the petition, right or wrong; and such treatment was in every respect unwarrantable, and no less contrary to sound policy than to equity and good manners.

All these representations, however, had no weight with administration: they affected great sorrow at being obliged to declare that the petition could not be received consistently with the interest of the kingdom; they put the merchants in mind that the American proceedings threatened fatally to diminish the commercial greatness of this kingdom, in which case none would suffer so much as themselves; and they insisted that confidence ought to be put in the wisdom of parliament, as it was not doubted that by properly asserting the supremacy of the British legislature in the manner proposed, all those advantages about which they were so anxious would be secured. They were therefore exhorted to submit to temporary inconveniences, which could not be avoided in the present posture of affairs, though probably they would not be of long duration.

In the mean time matters went on from bad to worse in New England; so that it was soon perceived either that the friends of government in that colony did not exert themselves, or that they were far from being so numerous as had been imagined. In order to make their coercive plan the more effectual, therefore, it was now judged necessary to extend it so that every individual of the colony should become sensible of the punishment. This, it was supposed, would be done by a bill for restraining the four provinces of New England from commerce with Great Britain, Ireland, or the British West India islands; and prohibiting them from carrying on the fishery at Newfoundland. The reasons given for this were in substance the same with those for the others; and indeed both parties had now so much exhausted their arguments, that very little new matter was left for either. Every step taken by ministry, and every proposal made by them, however, produced a violent debate; and though they constantly gained the victory, it was not without the mortification of hearing their principles and conduct reprobated in the most opprobrious manner. In the present instance the bill was carried by 261 against 85; but a petition against it was quickly offered by the London merchants concerned in the American trade, setting forth the danger that would accrue to the fisheries of Great Britain from such a prohibition.

From the evidence brought in support of this petition, it appeared, that ten years before the American coast of the fisheries had been in such a flourishing state, that the American four provinces of New England alone employed near fisheries, 46,000 tons of shipping and 6,000 seamen; and that the produce of their fisheries in the foreign markets amounted in the year 1764 to upwards of 320,000l. Since that time they had greatly increased; and what rendered the fisheries particularly valuable was, that all the materials used in them, excepting only the timber for building the vessels, and the salt for curing the fish, were purchased in Britain, and the net proceeds of the trade were also remitted thither. It appeared also, that it would not be practicable to transfer these fisheries to Halifax or Quebec, though ever so much encouragement were given to either of these places, as they had neither vessels nor people to man them, and would never be able to procure supplies of seamen from New England on account of the aversion of the inhabitants to the government of these two provinces.

Some other circumstances were likewise urged as strong reasons against this bill; particularly the commercial concerns of the city of London with New England (to which alone the colony stood indebted for near a million), and the bad consequences of it to the people of Nantucket. This is a barren island, lying off the coast of New England, about 15 miles long habitants of and three broad, containing about 6,000 inhabitants, all Quakers. The natural produce of this island, it was alleged, could not maintain 20 families; but the industry of the inhabitants was such, that they kept 130 vessels constantly employed in the whale-fishery, which they carried on in the north seas, to the coasts of Africa and Brazil, and even as far as the Falkland islands and the shores of Terra Magellanica. These people, it was said, ought undoubtedly to have been exempted from the common calamity, were it only from the applause due to so much industry and resolution.

The influence of Nantucket was so strong, that administration, with all their obstinacy, were obliged to relax Britain relax a little; and, of their own accord, afford them the relief they had such just reason to expect. That the petition in the main might prove unsuccessful, however, another was presented by the inhabitants of Poole, the tenor of which was directly opposite to that of the city of London. In this it was set forth, that the restrictions proposed by the bill would not prove detrimental to the trade of England, which was fully able, with proper exertions, to supply the demands of foreign markets. The advantage of the Newfoundland fishery more than that of New England to this country was, that it bred a great number of hardy seamen peculiarly fit for the service of the navy, while the New England seamen were, by act of parliament, exempt from being pressed. It appeared also from the examination of witnesses taken in support of this petition, that the fishery from Britain to Newfoundland employed about 400 ships, amounting to 360,000 tons, and 200 shallops carrying 20,000 tons and navigated by as many seamen. Each season produced 600,000 quintals of fish, and the returns at a moderate rate were valued at £50,000.

The bill was debated with great animosity in the house of peers, and produced a remarkable protest, in which the measures of government were spoken of with great severity. "That government (said they) which attempts to preserve its authority by destroying the trade of its subjects, and by involving the innocent and guilty in a common ruin, if it acts from a choice of such means, confesses itself unworthy; if from inability to find any other, admits itself wholly incompetent to the end of its institution." They also reproved in severe terms the affront already mentioned, that the Americans wanted spirit to resist, and that Britain would find them an easy conquest. Such language was represented as altogether void of foundation, and the mere effect of party-spirit and resentment. It was also the more imprudent and unadvised, as tending, in case of coercive measures, to slacken the care and solicitude with which they ought to be pursued, and to occasion remissness in those to whom they might be entrusted, from a persuasion that the enemy to be encountered was not to be feared, and could easily be overcome.

The final resolution of reducing the colonies by force being now taken, it became necessary to make proper preparations for the purpose: and in this the conduct of administration was little less censured than in other respects. As the above-mentioned opinion, that the Americans were timid and incapable of becoming soldiers, prevailed greatly at that time, a force of 10,000 men was judged sufficient to reduce the province of New England to obedience. This was vehemently opposed by the minority. They insisted that the force was totally inadequate, and only calculated to produce expense to no purpose. The first impression, they very justly observed, ought to be decisive, if possible; and in order to render it so, it was necessary to send such a fleet and army as might ensure the confidence of the public, and be certainly capable of surmounting all obstacles. Many of the friends of administration were of the same sentiments in this respect; and the only reason assigned for acting otherwise was a hope that the Americans would, upon more mature consideration, desist from their opposition. That they might the more readily be induced to this submission, Lord North's conciliatory proposition was formed. By this it was enacted, that when the governor, council, and assembly of any of the colonies, should propose to make a provision for the common defence, &c., and if such provision should be approved of by the king in parliament, the levying or imposing of taxes on that colony should then be forbidden, those duties excepted which it might be expedient to impose for the regulation of commerce; the net produce of which should be carried to the account of the colony where it was raised. But this proposal, though highly extolled by the friends of administration, was no less reprobated by minority than the others had been. It was said to be injurious, and calculated for the purpose of raising a revenue, which was now said to be the object of ministers. There was no essential difference between the present and former modes of taxation. The colonies were as effectually taxed without their consent by requiring them to pay a fixed sum, as by laying a number of duties upon them to the same amount. There was besides a capital deficiency in the proposal, viz. that no sum was specified; so that the Americans were left totally ignorant of what the demands of Britain might be. After a long debate, however, the question was carried in favour of administration by 274 to 88.

The like fate attended a petition to the throne from the island of Jamaica. Instead of relaxing anything of their severity, the ministry now included the southern colonies in the restrictions laid on New England. Still, however, the petitioners were indefatigable in their endeavours to be heard. The West India merchants and planters seconded their last petition by a large detail of circumstances relating to the British islands in that part of the world. This affair was conducted by Mr Glover, a gentleman equally celebrated for his literary talents and commercial knowledge. From his investigations it appeared, that, exclusive of the intrinsic worth of the islands themselves, their stock in trade and other property amounted to no less than 60 millions; the exportation to Britain had of late been near 200,000 hogsheads and puncheons of sugar and rum, amounting to no less than four millions in value; the direct revenue arising from which was 700,000 pounds, besides that which accrued from the collateral branches depending upon it. All this, however, was urged in vain. Conciliatory proposals were made by Mr Burke and Mr Hartley, but they were only rejected by great majorities. These proposals, indeed, instead of serving the cause they were meant to promote, did the very reverse. A dread was entertained of the consequences which might ensue from the republican opinions now prevalent in the colonies, and all partiality towards them was looked upon in such a criminal light, that their opponents became deaf, on many occasions, to the voice of reason and humanity when urged in their behalf. On the other hand, the favourites of America urged on by a furious zeal, and even resentment against those whom they both looked upon to be promoters of arbitrary measures, erred equally in their opposition to ministry. This violent party spirit appeared not only among the people at large, but broke forth with the utmost fury in parliament, where the debates often resembled the railings of Billingsgate rather than the deliberations of the first assembly in a great and powerful nation. In this temper of mind it is no wonder that the state of affairs was scarce ever truly represented by either party. Government continued to enact new laws, now in vain, against the Americans; their antagonists opposed these in a manner so little different from what has been already related, that any farther account of the debates would be as unentertaining as tedious.

Other petitions were presented and treated with neglect. The increase of union and preparations for war among the colonists were by the ministerial party treated as the mere commotions of a headstrong mob; and by the other as an afflication of an injured and virtuous people, who were about to found a mighty empire in the west, while Britain was to sink in utter disgrace and contempt by their mere secession, without making any account of their exploits in the field, which could not fail to equal those of the heroes of antiquity. On the same principles the event of the skirmish at Lexington was magnified by the one into a "disgraceful defeat" on the part of the British; and by the other treated with absolute unconcern, as if no regard whatever was to be paid to it, nor any inference drawn from thence concerning the fate of the war in general. Thus also the battle at Bunkers Hill, and all the transactions of the year 1775, were unfairly stated by both parties; and the only consequence ensuing from these misrepresentations was the inflaming to a violent degree the resentment betwixt the two parties; one of which deprecated the Americans to the rank of consummate poltroons, while the other exalted them almost to that of demi-gods.

While these altercations continued to agitate the minds of the superior classes of people in Britain, the middle and lower ranks remained in a kind of indifference, or rather were against the proceedings of ministry. This opposition could not indeed influence the councils of the nation, but in other respects it proved very troublesome. The levies were obstructed, and the recruiting service was never known to go on so heavily; numbers of people of that description not only refusing the usual proffers, but even reproaching the cause in which they were solicited to engage. Besides this, several officers of high rank showed a great aversion at the service. Lord Effingham, who had distinguished himself by his opposition to ministerial measures, resigned the command of his regiment rather than fight against the cause he had espoused so warmly. His example was followed by that of several other officers; and it is not to be doubted that, while this step conferred upon them a very considerable share of popularity, it excited in the minds of ministry an equal degree of resentment. Lord Effingham, in particular, received the public thanks of the cities of London and Dublin; both of which showed an extreme aversion to the commencement of hostilities with America. The former, indeed, could scarce refrain themselves within any bounds of moderation. After the affair at Lexington they framed a remonstrance and petition, animadverting in the most severe manner on the ministry and parliament; and it was not without the greatest difficulty that the more moderate party procured one to be drawn up, under the name of an "humble petition," couched in less reprehensible terms.

In the mean time several inconveniences began to be felt in different parts of the nation. The suspension of the sale and purchase of negro slaves in the West Indies and in North America, and the prohibition to export arms and gunpowder, had greatly impeded the African trade from Bristol and Liverpool. In consequence of this, a great number of ships which formerly failed from these ports had been laid up, and near 3000 sailors belonging to Liverpool dismissed from service. Their situation soon rendered them riotous; and it was not without the affiance of the military that they were quelled. These difficulties, however, made no impression on administration; who having once laid it down as a maxim, that the subjection of America was the greatest political good that could happen to Britain, were, in a confidence with their own principles, obliged to overlook every disaster that might happen in the mean time as a temporal inconvenience, which ought not to be regarded in the prosecution of a great and magnificent plan.

But whatever might be the views of administration in this respect, it was far otherwise with the generality of the nation. They felt the present inconveniencies severely, while the subjugation of America presented them with no solid foundation to hope for an equivalent. It was with the utmost satisfaction, therefore, last petitioners received the news of Mr Penn's arrival in the month of September; and in three days it was replied, that no answer would be given to it. This laconic procedure excited no small surprize, as it was universally allowed that the language of the petition was respectful, and that it expressed the highest desire of peace and reconciliation. Lord Dartmouth's answer, therefore, could not but be considered as a final renunciation of all friendly intercourse with the colonies, and which would drive them into a connexion with foreign powers; a resource at which they themselves had hinted when they first took up arms. It was also thought not only to be injudicious in itself, but very ill-timed, and not at all consistent with the situation of the affairs of Britain at that time. On the other hand, the friends of administration infirled, that the petition offered nothing that could in a constituency with the dignity of the British empire be taken any notice of. Instead of professing any repentance for their own conduct, they had offered stipulations, and even required concessions on the part of Britain. It was likewise said on the part of administration, that fear had a share in framing the proposals now held out. The Americans were very sensible, that though the first steps taken by Britain had not answered the purpose, much greater efforts would quickly follow; and that, without being allowed some time, it was impossible they could bring their matters to bear. The petition, therefore, might be considered as written with a view to procrastinate matters, which was by no means admissible on the part of Britain. The colonies were already well apprised of the conditions on which they would be restored to favour; and had it at any time in their power to put a stop to the operations of war by accepting these conditions; but it would be imprudent to to stop the military preparations upon such an uncertain expectation as the petition from congress held out. It was also plain, that a great majority of the nation approved of the measures of government; for addresses were received from all quarters, recommending, in the most explicit manner, a vigorous exertion against America.

The rejection of this petition inflamed the minds of both parties more than ever against each other. The obsolete distinction of Whig and Tory was now revived, and that with such animosity, that Britain itself, as well as America, now seemed in danger of becoming a seat of war and bloodshed. The Tories were accused as the promoters of those sanguinary addresses already mentioned. They were said to be the great misinformers of government; and the false representations they industriously procured from all quarters had contributed more than anything else to inflame the animosity and produce the civil war. They were upbraided with their attachment to the Stuart family. England, it was said, had, through their machinations, been made a scene of blood in the last century; and had been perpetually tottering on the brink of ruin from the Restoration to the Revolution. At that time indeed the more sensible part of the nation, wearied out with perpetual attempts to enslave them, took the resolution of expelling an ill-advised monarch, whom nothing could prevent from pursuing their pernicious plans to his own ruin. But the Tories were an incorrigible race, who could not be cured even by experience; for though they had seen repeated instances of the mischief attending their plans, they adhered to them with as great obstinacy as if the greatest benefits had on all occasions accrued from them. Diffusion at home and disgrace abroad had been the constant attendants of their councils; while the only objects they ever had in view were the establishment and propagation of their own tenets; for these alone they laboured, the honour and interest of the nation being entirely out of the question. These they would willingly sacrifice to the points above mentioned; and as an instance of the effects of their councils, the treaty of Utrecht was mentioned. Here, said their antagonists, the fruits of a triumphant war, carried on for twelve years, were lost at once by those feuds which the Tories occasioned through their restless endeavours to compass their iniquitous projects.

On the other hand, the Tories said that the Whigs were the genuine descendants and representatives of those republican incendiaries who had in the last century overturned the constitution and desolated the kingdom. They pretended indeed to assert the liberty of Britain; but under this pretence they wished to engross all the authority to themselves, as might easily be proved by an impartial examination of their conduct in the unhappy times alluded to. In the present dispute, the principal question was, Whether the king and parliament, when united, were to be obeyed or resisted? The Tories insisted that they were to be obeyed; the Whigs that they were to be resisted. The truth was, therefore, that there were two parties in Britain; the one of which was of opinion, that the colonies owed obedience to Great Britain in all cases whatever, and that in case of refusal they ought to be compelled to obey; but the other, though it acknowledged the same obligation on the colonies, thought it was unadvisable to force it. The only constitutional method of deciding this question was by an appeal to parliament. That appeal had already been made, and parliament had determined on compulsion. The decision ought therefore to be considered as that of the voice of the nation; and were a parliamentary majority to be viewed in any other light, all things would fall into confusion, and no rule of government remain. The doctrines of the Whigs were also said to be inadmissible in sound policy. Authority, sovereign and uncontrolled, must reside somewhere; and allowing every charge of bribery and corruption (which were brought by the other party most liberally) to be true, it were still better to be governed in some instances by such means, than to have no government at all. This must at least be the case were continual appeals to be made to the people; as they would undoubtedly be followed by perpetual broils at home as well as disasters abroad.

To these violent bickerings at home, some very serious commercial misfortunes were now added. It had been represented as very probable, during the last session of parliament, that the bill for depriving the people of New England of the benefits of the Newfoundland fishery, would redound greatly to the interest of Great Britain, by throwing into her hands alone the profits which were formerly divided with the colonies. This expectation, however, proved totally void of foundation. The number of ships fitted out that year was scarcely greater than usual. The congress had also prohibited them from being supplied with provisions; so that not only those on board the ships, but even the inhabitants on the island of Newfoundland itself, were in danger of perishing. Many of the ships were therefore obliged to go in quest of provisions, instead of prosecuting the business on which they came. On the whole, therefore, instead of any increase, the profits of the fishery suffered this year a diminution of near 500,000l. Along with this, some natural causes cooperated, which, by the more superstitious, were considered as the effects of divine wrath. A most violent and uncommon storm took place in these latitudes during the fishing season. The sea rose full 30 feet above its ordinary level; and that with such rapidity, that no time was allowed for avoiding its fury. Upwards of 700 fishing boats perished, with all the people in them; and some ships foundered, with their whole crews. Nor was the devastation much less on shore, as the waters broke in upon the land, occasioning vast loss and destruction.

By these misfortunes, the general stagnation of commerce, and the little success that had hitherto attended petitions, the British arms, the mercantile part of the nation were thrown into despair. Petitions were poured in from all quarters, the contents of which were similar to those already mentioned, and their reception was exactly the same. Ministers had determined on their plan; and the only difficulty was, how to put it in execution as quickly as they desired. For this purpose, application was made to the petty states of Germany, who are accustomed to hire out their forces, and who had frequently lent auxiliaries to Britain in former cases of exigency. At present, however, the scheme met with considerable difficulties, occasioned by the distance, as well as the danger, danger, of the desertion of the mercenaries. The princes were likewise alarmed at the appearance of losing so many subjects for ever; while the latter were no less startled at the proposal of being transported across the ocean into a new world, there to be exposed to all the miseries of war, with very little hope of ever seeing their native country again. Other resources, however, were devised, by calling in the assistance of the Hessians, and obtaining from Holland that body of Scots troops which had been so long in their service. But in both France and these views administration were disappointed. All the states of Europe looked upon Britain with an invidious eye, though none so much as Holland and France; these being the two powers who had most reason to hope for advantage from the quarrel. A very strong party in Holland contended for the American interest. Pamphlets were daily published at Amsterdam in justification of the colonies; their case was compared with that of the Netherlands in former times; and they were exhorted to persevere in their claims against the pretensions of Britain. They represented as infatuated covetous of wealth and power, and desirous of seizing every thing she could. She was also taxed with being of a domineering disposition, and that she had become intolerable, since her successes in the war of 1755, not only to her neighbours, but to the whole world: nay, that even during the war she had exercised an absolute sovereignty at sea, and did not scruple to avow a right and title to rule over that element.

But though these powers thus early expressed their hostile disposition towards Britain, it was otherwise with the princes of Hesse and Brunswick; by whom, and some other German princes of inferior note, a considerable number of troops were supplied. At the same time, that as many British forces as possible might be employed, large draughts were made from the garrisons of Gibraltar and Minorca, who were supplied in return with an equal number of men from the electorate of Hanover. In justice to the ministers, indeed, it must be owned, that they prosecuted the scheme they had undertaken with all possible vigour; insomuch that the expenses already began to occasion considerable alarm. This was owing, in the first instance, to the bad success of the British arms, which occasioned a demand on this country altogether unlooked for. It had always been supposed, that the British army would be completely victorious; or at least would remain so far matters of the field, that they could easily command what supplies of fresh provisions were necessary. Instead of this, they were now cooped up in such a manner as to be actually in danger of perishing for want. The supplies, therefore, of necessity, were sent from Britain; and indeed the exertions for their relief were such as must give high ideas of the opulence and spirit of the British nation. For these troops there were shipped no fewer than 5000 live oxen, 14,000 sheep, with a proportionate number of hogs, immense quantities of vegetables, prepared with all possible care; 10,000 butts of small beer, and 5000 butts of strong beer. Some idea of the expenses of these articles may be obtained from an account of what was paid for articles trifling in comparison of the above. For a regiment of light horse in Boston, 20,000l. were paid for oats, hay, and beans. The articles of vinegar, vegetables, and casks, at no less; and every thing else in proportion. The contingencies occasioned by military operations amounted to near 500,000l. The prodigious expenses, therefore, of maintaining an inconsiderable armament at such a distance, could not fail to give a very unfavourable opinion of the war at large, and justly raise suspicions, that even the treasures of Britain would not be able to defray the expense. One advantage, however, was derived from such immense profusion; the price of every thing was augmented; that of shipping particularly rose one-fourth in the ton; and though the profits made by contractors and their numerous friends were complained of, the benefits which accrued to multitudes employed in the various branches of public business seemed in some measure to make amends for everything.

Misfortune, however, seemed now to attend every almost all scheme in which Britain engaged herself. Some part the bottom of it, indeed, in the present case, might be derived from mismanagement. The failing of the transports taken was delayed so long that their voyages were lost. They remained for a long time wind-bound; and, after leaving port, met with such stormy weather, that they were tossed to and fro in the Channel till most of the live stock they had on board perished. After clearing the coast of England, their progress was retarded by a continuance of bad weather. They were forced by the periodical winds from the coast of America into the ocean. Some were driven to the West Indies, others were captured by American privateers, and only a very few reached the harbour of Boston, with their cargoes, quite damaged, so that they could be of little or no use. Notwithstanding the immense supplies above-mentioned, therefore, a subscription was set on foot for the relief of the soldiers, as well as of the families of those who died in the service. This was liberal on the whole, though many refused to contribute, from their disapprobation of the cause; and bitter complaints were made of want of economy throughout the whole American department.

All this time the violent animosities between the violent parties continued; the desire of peace was gradually extinguished on both sides; and the foundation laid betwixt the of an enmity scarcely ever to be extinguished. Each person seemed to be seriously of opinion that the other would willingly ruin the nation if possible; a remarkable instance of which was the commitment of Stephen Sayre, Mr Sayre Esq., banker (one of the trustees of the preceding year), committed to the Tower for high treason. The accusation laid against him was no less than that of having formed a design to seize his majesty as he went to the house of lords; but the scheme itself, and the method in which it was to be executed, appeared both so ridiculous, that the prisoner was very soon discharged; after which he commenced a process against Lord Rochfort for false imprisonment.

With respect to the parliamentary proceedings during this period, very little can be said, further than that every measure of administration, whether right or wrong, was violently opposed. The employment of foreign troops, and admitting them into the fortresses of Gibraltar and Minorca, were most severely censured, as being contrary to the bill of rights. Administration contended that this bill only forbade the introduction of a foreign military power into the kingdom during ring peace; but the times were not peacable, and the introduction of the troops was evidently with a view to quell a rebellion. The force designed for the conquest of America was then declared to be inadequate to the purpose; but it was replied, on the part of ministry, that the design was to conciliate, not to conquer. The force (25,000 men) was sufficient to strike terror; and though this should not instantly be produced, conciliatory offers would still be held out after every blow that was struck.

In the mean time the Americans, sensible of the dangerous situation in which they stood, exerted themselves to the utmost to dislodge the British troops from Boston. This being at length accomplished in March 1776, they proceeded to put their towns in the most formidable state of defence; inasmuch that they seem, if properly defended, to have been almost impregnable. This was evident from the repulse of Sir Peter Parker at Charlestown: but they did not exert equal spirit in the defence of New York; where, besides losing the town, they received such a defeat as seemed to threaten their affairs with total ruin. See AMERICA.

In this view it appeared to the generality of the people in Britain. The successful campaign of 1776 was looked upon as so decisive, that little room was left to suppose the Americans capable of ever retrieving their affairs. Opposition were much embarrassed, and now almost reduced to the single argument of the interference of foreign powers, which they had often unsuccessfully used before. Besides this, indeed, the obstinacy of the Americans in refusing the offers of Lord Howe, even at the moment of their greatest depression, seemed to be a very bad presage. The strength of ministry, however, now became so decisive, that whatever they proposed was immediately carried. The number of leaues for 1777 was augmented to 45,000, and upwards of five millions voted for the expense of the navy, and to discharge its debt. The expenses of the land-service amounted to near three millions, besides the extraordinary of the former year, which amounted to more than 1,200,000; and though this vast provision became the subject of much complaint and animadversion, the power of ministry silenced every opposer.

But however administration might now triumph, their exultation was but of short continuance. The misfortune of General Burgoyne at Saratoga threw the whole nation into a kind of despair, and reduced the ministry to the greatest perplexity. The great difficulty now was to contrive means for raising a sufficient number of forces to carry on the war: but from this they extricated themselves by what must be allowed a masterly contrivance. This was the encouraging levies for government service by cities and private persons; and as the design was kept a profound secret before the Christmas recess, they were not disturbed by the dangerous clamours of opposition. The recess was purposely extended in order to give time for the scheme to take effect; and before parliament met again it was actually accomplished, so that ministers could once more face their opponents without any fear.

Another and more weighty consideration, however, now occurred. The European states in general had long beheld the grandeur of Britain with an invidious eye. The news of the disaster at Saratoga was therefore received among them as those of the defeat of Charles XII. at Pultowa was among the powers whom he had so long commanded. Of all these the French, for obvious reasons, were the most active in supporting the Americans. Numbers of the young nobility were eager to signalize themselves in the American cause; and among the rest the marquis de la Fayette, a young nobleman of the first rank and fortune. Impelled by an enthusiastic ardour in favour of the American cause, he purchased a vessel, loaded her with military stores, and sailed in her with several of his friends to America, where he presented his services to congress. From them he met with a most gracious reception, and was invested with a command, in which he felt no opportunity of distinguishing himself. Besides this nobleman, several other officers from France and Germany actually entered the American service; and by their military talents greatly contributed to the exertions which the colonies were afterwards enabled to make.

This assistance, however, would have been but trifling, had not the French court also interested itself in their behalf; for by the time, or very soon after, the news of General Burgoyne's disaster arrived in Britain, a treaty was on foot between the French court and the United States of America.

Even before this time France had showed such an extreme partiality towards the Americans, as might have plainly indicated their design of ultimately afflicting them in their national capacity. The encouragement given to the American privateers in all the ports of France had produced strong remonstrances on the part of Britain; and an order was at last demanded, that all these privateers with their prizes should depart the kingdom. With this they found it necessary to comply at that time, lest reprisals should be made by capturing their whole Newfoundland fleet then out on the fishery. So many delays, however, were made on various pretences, that not a single vessel was dismissed from any of their ports. So far indeed were the French court from any design of this kind, that in the month of July 1777 the whole body of merchants throughout the kingdom were assured from government that they might depend on protection in their trade with America.

All this time the greatest preparations were made throughout the whole kingdom of France for war; so that the most judicious politicians were of opinion that a rupture with that power would have immediately followed the commencement of hostilities with America, and for which the behaviour of the former furnished abundant reasons of justification. Whatever might have been the motives of the British ministry, however, it is certain, that in defiance of probability, even when joined by the most acrimonious censures of opposition, they continued to pretend ignorance of any hostile intentions in the court of France, until that court of its own accord thought proper to announce them. This Treaty was done by a formal notification to the court of Britain in the month of March 1778, and that in the most mortifying terms. In this declaration it was announced, not only that a treaty of friendship and commerce was concluded betwixt France and America, but Britain was insulted with being told that America was actually in possession of independency, as if the for- mer had already exerted her utmost efforts without being able to reduce them. A merit was also made of having entered into no commercial stipulations in favour of France exclusive of Britain. Nothing, therefore, could be more offensive; and though it could not decently be said on the part of the French monarch that he wished for war, yet his pacific intentions were conveyed in such haughty terms, that the whole could only be considered as a declaration of those hostilities which he pretended to avoid.

Both parties now united in their opinion that a war with France was unavoidable; but they were not for that reason any farther advanced towards a reconciliation. It must be owned, indeed, that the minority had now, according to their own account, received very great provocation. They had from the beginning reproached the American war, and prognosticated its bad success. In this they had been overruled, and the character of the Americans represented in such a manner as almost to preclude the idea of their being able to resist. They had resisted, however; and by destroying or taking prisoners a whole army, verified those predictions which had been so often treated with ridicule. The popular party had, times without number, insisted in the most earnest manner for some kind of concession towards America; but this had constantly been refused with an unparalleled and inveterate obstinacy. They now saw these very concessions offered to America after the defeat of Burgoyne, which, had they been granted in time, would have prevented all the mischief. Added to all this, the expenses for the ensuing year had been hurried through the house before the Christmas vacation; the levies had been raised by subscription without consent of parliament at all; yet both these proceedings had been determined to be strictly legal and constitutional. Every inquiry into the measures of government had been frustrated; and one into the state of the nation in general, which could not be absolutely rejected, was rendered ineffectual by delays and evasion. Lastly, they now saw their country involved in a foreign war with a nation well provided for all emergencies, while we had supinely suffered them to go on, without making the least effort to put ourselves in a proper state of defence.

For these reasons opposition insisted that the present ministry ought no longer to be trusted with the management of public affairs. An acknowledgment of the independence of America was now by many supposed to be the only rational step that could be taken, which might now be done with a good grace, and which we would unavoidably be obliged to take at last whether we would or not. By acknowledging this independence before they had time to enter into exclusive engagements with France, their trade would be open to all the world. This of course would lessen their correspondence with France, and leave them at liberty to form such connections as they thought most proper. The ministerial party, however, still insisted on vigorous measures, representing it as a spiritless and disgraceful measure to bend beneath the power of France, and setting forth the resources of Great Britain as sufficient to resist the efforts of all her enemies. The dishonour of leaving the American loyalists exposed to the resentment of their countrymen was also set forth in the strongest manner. These, by very intelligent people, were said to be by far the greater number. Was it not more eligible, on the very strength of such an affirmation, to make trial of its veracity, and to put arms into their hands? Whatever the danger of the experiment might be, we could not abandon them without exposing our reputation, and losing that character of fidelity to our engagements for which we had hitherto been so justly respected. Unanimity in the present case was strongly, and indeed very justly, insisted upon; but when opposition complained of some occult irresistible influence, by which the councils of the nation were directed, in despite of every suggestion of reason and argument, the charge was denied in the strongest manner, and ministers disclaimed every motive of their conduct, excepting that of an internal conviction of its own rectitude.

Notwithstanding the violence of these altercations, however, the greatest courage and steadiness was manifested by the cool and deliberate part of the nation. The French resolved in the first place to excite a general terror by threatening an invasion. This was evidently impracticable, without their procuring first the superiority at sea; yet as multitudes in the country were apt to be terrified by the very mention of a French invasion, orders were issued to draw out and embody the militia, which was then composed of men in every respect as well exercised and disciplined as any regular troops. It was complained, however, that a French squadron of 12 ships of the line had d'Estaing failed from Toulon without any obstruction, under sails with the command of the count d'Estaing. The most grievous apprehensions were entertained from the inferiority of Lord Howe's naval force, which might expose him to a total defeat, and the whole fleet of transports to be taken or destroyed by the enemy. But whatever might have been the probabilities in this case, it is certain that either the fortune or conduct of this commander were such, that no exploit of any great consequence was ever performed by him. That matters, however, might be put in the best situation possible, addresses were moved for the recalling of the fleets and armies from America, in order to station them in places where they might contribute more effectually to the defence of the kingdom. This was opposed not only by administration, but even by some of the most popular members of opposition themselves. Of this opinion were Lord Chatham and the earl of Shelburne; the former of whom resisted it with a vehemence of speech peculiar on this occasion.

The operations of the French in America, with the Exploits of various success of the war, are related under the article d'Estaing.

United States of AMERICA. Here we have only to take notice, that d'Estaing having failed in his attempt on the British fleet at New York, and in assisting his allies in their attempt on Rhode island, as well as having by other parts of his conduct greatly disgusted them, failed for the West Indies, where he unsuccessfully attacked the island of St Lucia*. Being repulsed in this attempt,* See St he failed to the island of Grenada, which he reduced, Lucia. treating the vanquished in a very cruel manner †;† See Gre while a body of troops dispatched by him also reduced nada* the island of St Vincent.

By this time the French admiral was powerfully reinforced; so that his fleet consisted of 26 sail of the During the time he was employed at Grenada, Admiral Byron with the British squadron was accompanying the homeward-bound West-India fleet till out of danger; after which he sailed with a body of troops under General Grant for the recovery of St Vincent; but before they could reach that island, certain intelligence was received of the descent at Grenada. On this they steered directly for that island, where they encountered the French fleet without hesitation, notwithstanding the great superiority of the latter. At this time the French squadron amounted to 27 sail of the line and seven frigates; while that of Britain consisted only of 21 line of battle ships and one frigate. The British admirals, Byron and Barrington, endeavoured to bring the enemy to a close engagement, but this was as fruitlessly avoided by d'Eistaing; and such was the dexterity and circumspection with which the latter conducted matters, that it was only by seizing the transient opportunities of the different movements occasioned by the wind and weather, that some of the British ships could close in with their antagonists. Even when this was the case, the engagement was carried on upon such unequal terms, that the British ships were terribly shattered. For some time Captains Collingwood, Edwards, and Cornwallis, stood the fire of the whole French fleet. Captain Fanshaw of the Monmouth, a 64 gun ship, singly threw himself in the way of the enemy's van to stop them. Several of the British ships forced their way to the very mouth of St George's harbour in the island of Grenada; but finding it in the hands of the French, an end was put to the engagement; nor did the French care to renew it, though the British ships had suffered very much.

D'Eistaing now having received fresh reinforcements, set sail for the continent of America, after convoying the homeward-bound fleet of French merchantmen in their return from the West-Indian islands. His disastrous attempt on the town of Savannah, with the subsequent disorder betwixt him and the colonists, are related under the article United States of AMERICA. Here we have only to take notice, that thus the fears which had been excited by the superiority of the French in the West Indian seas were effectually dissipated. The islands of Dominica, St Vincent, and Grenada, were indeed lost; the first being taken by the marquis de Bouillé, governor of Martinique, and the two last by d'Eistaing as already related; but these successes were balanced by the failure of the French commander in every other enterprise; by his terrible disaster at the Savannah; and by the acquisition of St Lucia, which was taken in the year 1778 by Admiral Barrington and Generals Copcot and Meadows. In other parts of the West Indian seas also the honour of the British arms was very effectually supported by the bravery and vigilance of the commanders on that station. Here Admiral Hyde Parker, assisted by Admiral Rowley, kept the enemy in continual alarm, and intercepted the trade of the French islands in such a manner as greatly distressed them. Three large frigates dispatched by Count d'Eistaing after his failure in America were taken, and a great part of a convoy seized or destroyed in sight of M. de la Motte Piquet's squadron in the harbour of Fort Royal at Martinico, the admiral himself having narrowly escaped. He had sailed out of that harbour, in order to favour the escape of the convoy already mentioned; which having partly effected, he withdrew; but was pursued so closely, that he had scarcely time to shelter himself under the batteries on shore.

These successes, which happened in the years 1778, 1779, and beginning of 1780, kept the event of the war pretty much in an equilibrium on the western seas and continent; but in the mean time the most unhappy dissensions prevailed through every department of the British government in Europe, which threatened at last to involve the whole nation in confusion and bloodshed.

Among other charges brought by the members in opposition against the ministry, that of neglecting the navy had been one of the most considerable; nor indeed does it appear that the charge was altogether without foundation. Without a fleet, however, it was now impossible to avoid the danger of an invasion. At this time, indeed, the fleet was in a very weak condition, but the valour and experience of the officers seemed to make amends for the defects. The chief command was given to Admiral Keppel, who had served with uncommon reputation during the last war, of Admiral Admirals Sir Robert Harland and Sir Hugh Palliser Keppel, served under him, both of them officers of undoubted courage and capacity. Arriving at Portsmouth towards the end of March 1778, Admiral Keppel exerted himself with so much industry and diligence, that, exclusive of those ships which it was found necessary to dispatch to the coast of North America under Admiral Byron, a fleet of 20 sail of the line was got in complete readiness by the beginning of June, and ten more in a forward state of preparation.

At the head of this fleet Admiral Keppel sailed from Portsmouth on the 13th of June, in order to protect the vast number of commercial shipping expected from all parts of the world, and at the same time to watch the motions of the French fleet at Brest.

On the arrival of the British fleet off the coast of France, two French frigates approached it, in order to make their observations. These were the Licorne of 32 guns and the Belle Poule of 26. In consequence of a signal to give chase, the Milford frigate overtook the Licorne towards the close of the day, and requested the French captain to come under the British admiral's stern; upon his refusal, a ship of the line came up, and compelled him to come into the fleet. Next morning, the Licorne seeming by her motions to be altering her course, a shot was fired across her way as a signal for keeping it. Hereupon she discharged a broadside and a volley of small arms into the America of 64 guns that lay close to her, and immediately struck. The behaviour of the French captain was the more astonishing, as Lord Longford, captain of the America, was at that instant engaged in conversation with him in terms of civility; but though such behaviour certainly merited severe chastisement, no hostile return was made.

The Arethusa of 26 guns, commanded by Captain Marshal, with the Alert cutter, was meanwhile in pursuit of the Belle Poule, that was also accompanied by a schooner, and the chase was continued till they were both out of sight of the fleet. On his coming up, he informed informed the French captain of his orders to bring him to the admiral, and requested his compliance. This being refused, the Arethusa fired a shot across the Belle Poule, which she returned with a discharge of her broadside. The engagement thus begun, continued more than two hours with uncommon warmth and fury.

The Belle Poule was greatly superior not only in numbers, but in the weight of her metal: her guns were all 12 pounders; those of the Arethusa only six. Notwithstanding this inferiority, she maintained so desperate a fight, that the French frigate suffered a much greater loss of men than the British. The slain and wounded on board the former, amounted, by their own account, to near 100; on board the latter they were not half that proportion.

Captain Fairfax in the Alert, during the engagement between the two frigates, attacked the French schooner, which being of much the same force, the dispute continued two hours with great bravery on both sides, when he struck to the English cutter.

The Arethusa received so much damage, that she became almost unmanageable; the captain endeavoured to put her into such a position, as to continue the engagement; but was unable to do it. Being at the same time upon the enemy's coast, and close on the shore, the danger of grounding in such a situation obliged him to act with the more caution, as it was midnight. The Belle Poule, in the mean time, stood into a small bay surrounded with rocks, where she was protected from all attacks: she had suffered so much that the captain, apprehending that she could not stand another engagement, had resolved, in case he found himself in danger of one, to run her aground; but her situation prevented any such attempt; and as soon as it was day-light, a number of boats came out from shore, and towed her into a place of safety. Notwithstanding the evident and great superiority on the side of the French, this action was extolled by them as a proof of singular bravery, and the account of it received with as much triumph as if it had been a victory.

On the 18th of June, the day following the engagement with the Belle Poule, another frigate fell in with the British fleet; and was captured by the admiral's orders, on account of the behaviour of the Licorne.

The capture of these French frigates produced such intelligence to the admiral, as proved of the utmost importance, at the same time that it was highly alarming. He was informed that the fleet at Brest consisted of 32 ships of the line and 12 frigates. This was in every respect a most fortunate discovery, as he had no more with him than 20 ships of the line and three frigates. The superiority of the enemy being such as neither skill nor courage could oppose in his present circumstances; and as the consequences of a defeat must have been fatal to this country, he thought himself bound in prudence to return to Portsmouth for a reinforcement. Here he arrived on the 27th of June, and remained there till the ships from the Mediterranean, and the Spanish and Portuguese trade, and the summer fleet from the West Indies, coming home, brought him a supply of seamen, and enabled him to put to sea again, with an addition of ten ships of the line. But still there was a great deficiency of frigates, owing to the great numbers that were on the American station, and the necessity of manning the ships of the line preferably to all others.

In the mean time, the preparations at Brest being fully completed, the French fleet put to sea on the 8th of July. It consisted of 32 sail of the line, besides a large number of frigates. Count D'Orvilliers commanded in chief. The other principal officers in this fleet were Counts Duchaffault, de Guichen, and de Graille; Monseigneur de Rochechort and Monseigneur de la Motte Piquet. A prince of the blood royal had also been sent to serve on board of this fleet; this was the duke of Chartres, son and heir to the duke of Orleans, first prince of the blood royal of France in the collateral line. He commanded one of the divisions in quality of admiral.

On the 9th day of July, the British fleet sailed out of Portsmouth in three divisions; the first commanded by Sir Robert Harland, the third by Sir Hugh Palliser, and the centre by Admiral Keppel, accompanied by Admiral Campbell, an officer of great courage and merit. The French had been informed that the British fleet was greatly inferior to their own; which was but too true at the time when they received this information. Being yet unapprised of the reinforcement it was returned with, the admiral failed at first in quest of it, intending to attack it while in the weak condition it had been represented to him.

As the British admiral was equally intent on coming to action as soon as possible, they were not long before they met. On the 23rd of July they came in sight. But the appearance of the British ships soon convinced the French admiral of his mistake, and he immediately determined to avoid an engagement no less cautiously than he eagerly fought it before.

Herein he was favoured by the approach of night: All that could be done on the part of the British was to form the line of battle in expectation that the enemy would do the same. During the night the wind changed favourably for the French, as to give them the weather gage. This putting the choice of coming to action, or of declining it, entirely in their own power, deprived the British admiral of the opportunity of forcing them to engage as he had proposed.

During the space of four days, the French had the option of coming to action; but constantly exerted their utmost care and industry to avoid it. The British fleet continued the whole time beating up against the wind, evidently with a resolution to attack them. But notwithstanding the vigour and skill manifested in this pursuit, the British admiral had the mortification to see his endeavours continually eluded by the vigilance and precaution of the enemy not to lose the least advantage that wind and weather could afford.

The chase lasted till the 27th of July. Between 10 and 11 in the morning, an alteration of wind and weather occasioned several motions in both fleets, that brought them, unintentionally on the part of the French, and chiefly through the dexterous management of the British admiral, so near each other, that it was no longer in their power to decline an engagement. Both fleets were now on the same tack: had they to remained, the British fleet on coming up with the French would have had an opportunity of a fair engagement, ship to ship; which would hardly have failed of proving very decisive: but this was a manner of combat- Sir Hugh Palliser still continued to windward, he made a signal for all the ships in that position to come into his wake; Sir Hugh Palliser repeated this signal; but it was unluckily mistaken by the ships of his division as an order to come into his own wake, which they did accordingly; and as he still remained in his position, they retained theirs of course.

Sir Robert Harland was now directed to take his station ahead, and the signal repeated for Sir Hugh Palliser's division to come into his wake; but this signal was not complied with, any more than a verbal message to that purpose, and other subsequent signals for that division's coming into its station in the line, before it was too late to recommence any operations against the enemy.

In the night, the French took the determination to put it wholly out of the power of the British fleet to attack them a second time. For this purpose, three of their swiftest sailing vessels were fixed in the stations occupied during the day by the three admirals' ships of the respective divisions, with lights at the mast-heads, to deceive the British fleet into the belief that the French fleet kept its position with an intent to fight next morning. Protected by this stratagem, the remainder of the French fleet drew off unperceived and unsuspected during the night, and retired with all speed towards Brest; they continued this retreat the whole course of the following day, and entered that port in the evening. Their departure was not discovered till break of day; but it was too late to pursue them, as they were only discernible from the mast-heads of the largest ships in the British fleet. The three ships that had remained with the lights were pursued; but the vessels that chased them were so unable to overtake them from the damages they had received in the preceding day's engagement, that they were quickly recalled; and the admiral made the best of his way to Plymouth, as being the nearest port, in order to put his fleet into a proper condition to return in quest of the enemy.

The killed and wounded on board the British fleet, amounted to somewhat more than 500; but the French, it has been asserted on grounds of great credibility, lost 3000. This appears the less improbable, from the consideration that the French, in all their naval engagements, aim principally at the masts and rigging, and the British chiefly at the body of the ships.

This action, whatever might have been the merit of the commanders, proved a source of the most fatal animosities. The bulk of the nation had so long been accustomed to hear of great and glorious victories at sea, that it was supposed a kind of impossibility for a French and British fleet to encounter without the total ruin of the former. The event of the last engagement, therefore, became an object of very severe criticism; and complaints were made, that, through the end trial of bad conduct of the blue division, an opportunity had been lost of gaining a complete victory over the French fleet. These complaints were quickly introduced into the public papers; and were carried on with a warmth and vehemence that set the whole nation into a ferment of the most violent and outrageous nature. The friends of Sir Hugh Palliser, the vice-admiral of the blue, were no less violent in the defence of his conduct than his opponents were in its condemnation; while while those who espoused the cause of the admiral, manifested no less determination in accusing him of being the real cause of the escape of the French fleet, through his disobedience of the signals and orders of his commander, and by remaining at a distance with his division, instead of coming to the assistance of the rest of the fleet.

An accusation of so weighty a nature very much alarmed Sir Hugh Palliser. He therefore applied to Admiral Keppel for a justification of his conduct; and required of him to sign and publish a paper relative to the engagement of the 27th of July; therein specifying as a fact, that he did not intend by his signals on the evening of that day to renew the battle then, but to be in readiness for it the next morning.

On the rejection of this demand, Sir Hugh Palliser published in one of the daily papers a variety of circumstances concerning that engagement; reflecting severely on the conduct of the admiral, and prefacing the whole by a letter signed with his name.

An attack so public, and so detrimental to his character, induced Admiral Keppel to declare to the admiralty, that unless Sir Hugh Palliser should explain this matter to his satisfaction, he could not, consistently with his reputation, ever act conjointly with him.

This altercation happening before the meeting of parliament, was of course taken notice of when it met. In the house of peers an inquiry was demanded into the conduct of the commanders of the fleet on the 27th of July, on account of the declaration of Admiral Keppel, that he would not resume the command until such an inquiry had taken place.

In the house of commons also it was urged, that as Admiral Keppel had expressed a public refusal to serve in conjunction with Sir Hugh Palliser, the cause of such a declaration ought to be investigated. Admiral Keppel and Sir Hugh Palliser, who were both present in the house on this occasion, spoke severally to the point in question in support of their respective conduct. The issue of the contest between them was, that a motion was made for an address to the crown to bring Sir Hugh Palliser to a trial for his behaviour in the late engagement with the French fleet. In answer to this motion, Sir Hugh Palliser replied, in a speech of great warmth and vehemence, that he had already demanded and obtained a court martial to fit on Admiral Keppel, whom he charged with having through his misconduct caused the failure of success in that engagement.

This intelligence was received with great astonishment in the house. It had been, and still continued to be, the general desire of individuals of all parties, to heal this breach between the two officers at a time when the services of both were so much needed. It was therefore with universal concern the house was informed of the determination that had been taken to bring Admiral Keppel to a trial. The admiral, however, conducted himself on this occasion with remarkable temper and coolness of expression. He acquiesced without reluctance in the orders that had been laid upon him to prepare for a trial of his conduct; which he hoped would not, upon inquiry, appear to have been dishonourable or injurious to his country, any more than disgraceful to himself.

The conduct of the board of admiralty in admitting the charges against Admiral Keppel, and appointing a trial, was greatly condemned in the house. It was said to have been their duty to have laboured with the utmost earnestness, and exerted their whole official influence, to stifle this unhappy disagreement between two brave and valuable men; the consequences of which they well knew, and ought to have obviated, by interposing as reconciliators, instead of promoting the dispute, by consenting to bring it to a judicial and public hearing. On the other hand, it was answered, that they could not, consistently with the impartiality which they owed to every officer of the navy, refuse to receive all matters of complaint relating to subjects of their department. They had no right to decide on the merits of any case laid before them, but were bound to refer it to a court composed of naval officers, who were the only proper and competent judges of each others conduct in professional matters. In conformity with these principles, which were founded upon the clearest equity, they left the decision of the present altercation to the gentlemen of the navy; whose honour and integrity in all instances of this kind had never been called in question, and by whose verdict alone it was but just and reasonable that every officer in that line of service should wish to stand or fall.

The arguments upon this subject were urged with great heat and violence on both sides. They produced uncommon animosity and rancour, and gave rise to a spirit of contention that diffused itself through all classes of society. Such was the height of passion that prevailed everywhere, that the critical circumstances of the nation were wholly forgotten, and the attention of the public entirely absorbed in this fatal dispute. Individuals of all ranks and all professions engaged in it with as much zeal as if they had been personally concerned in the issue. The dissatisfaction that was excited upon this occasion among the upper classes in the navy, appeared in a memorial presented to the king by twelve of the eldest and most distinguished admirals, at the head of whom was the name of Lord Hawke. The conduct of Sir Hugh Palliser was therein condemned without reserve; that of the admiralty itself was severely censured, as having established a precedent pregnant with the most ruinous consequences to the naval service of the kingdom. By the measure it had now adopted, that board had submitted to become the instrument of any individual who might be prompted by iniquitous motives to deprive the navy of its best and highest officers. It was a destructive violation, they said, of all order and discipline in the navy, to permit and countenance long concealed, and afterwards precipitately adopted charges, and recriminatory accusations of subordinate officers against their commanders in chief. It was no less improper and scandalous, to suffer men at once in high civil office, and in subordinate command, previous to their making such accusation, to attempt to corrupt the judgement of the public, by publishing libels on their officers in a common newspaper, which tended at once to excite dissensions in the navy, and to prejudice the minds of those who were to try the merits of the accusation against the superior officer.

It was remarkable in this memorial, that the majority of those who subscribed it were not only officers of the first rank and importance in the navy, but unconnected with the opposition, and attached by various motives... motives to the court and ministry. This evinced their conduct in the present instance to have been uninfluenced by considerations of party.

No business of any consequence was agitated in either of the houses of parliament while the trial continued. It began upon the 7th of January 1779, and lasted more than a month, not ending till the 11th day of February ensuing. After a long and accurate investigation of every species of evidence that could be produced, the court-martial acquitted Admiral Keppel of all the charges that had been brought against him in the most complete and honourable manner. He was declared to have acted the part of a judicious, brave, and experienced officer; and the accusation was condemned in the most severe manner.

Both houses of parliament voted him their thanks for the eminent services he had performed, and the whole nation rejoiced with his applause. The city of London bestowed every honour and mark of respect in its power upon Admiral Keppel; while the resentment against his accuser was so strong, that it constrained him to retire wholly from public life, and to resign all his employments.

But notwithstanding the high degree of national favour and esteem in which Admiral Keppel now stood, he thought it prudent to withdraw from a situation wherein he found himself not acceptable to those in power, by resigning his command.

The conduct of those who presided at the admiralty board now became an object of severe censure; and a number of facts were cited to prove that its conduct for many years past had been highly reprehensible. The debates were uncommonly violent; and the resolution to condemn the conduct of the admiralty was lost only by a majority of 34. Administration, however, still kept their ground; for though a second attempt was made to show that the state of the navy was inadequate to the vast sums bestowed upon it, the point was again lost by much the same majority. The argument used by the ministry in defence of their conduct in this case was, that the ships now constructed were of a much larger size, and consequently much more expensive than formerly. But however they might be victorious in argument, it is certain that the conduct of the admiralty was very far from giving general satisfaction at present. Not only Admiral Keppel, but Lord Howe, declared his resolution to relinquish the service while it continued under the direction of its managers at that time. Their resignation was followed by that of Sir Robert Harland, Sir John Lindlay, and several others; nay, so general was the dislike to the service now become, that no fewer than 22 captains of the first division had proposed to go in a body to resign their commissions at once; and were prevented from doing so only by the great occasion they saw there was at that time for their services.

This extreme aversion to the service produced a direct attack upon Lord Sandwich, at that time first lord of the admiralty. But though in this as well as other cases the ministry were still victorious, they could not prevent an inquiry into the cause of our want of success in the American war. This was insisted upon by Lord and General Howe, whose conduct had been so much reflected upon, that a vindication was become absolutely necessary. The inquiry was indeed very disagreeable to administration, and therefore evaded as long as possible. From the evidence of Lord Cornwallis and other officers of high rank, however, it appeared that the forces sent to America were not at any time sufficient to reduce it; that the Americans were almost universally unfriendly to the British cause; and that the nature of the country was such, that the conquest of it must be excessively difficult. It appeared also, that the camp of the Americans on Long island was so strong, that it could not have been attacked with any probability of success, after their defeat in 1776, without artillery and other necessary preparations. In every instance, therefore, the general's conduct was shown to have been the most eligible and judicious possible. These facts, however, being directly opposite to what the ministry wished to appear, counter evidence was brought in, with a view to invalidate the testimony of the very respectable witnesses above mentioned. In this business only two were examined, viz. Major-general Robertson, and Mr Joseph Galloway an American gentleman. From the evidence of Mr Galloway especially, it appeared, that the conduct of General Howe had not been unexceptionable; that the greater part of the Americans were friendly to the cause of Britain; that the country was not so full of obstructions as had been represented; woods and forests being no obstructions to the marching of armies in as many columns as they pleased; that soldiers might carry provisions for 10 days on their backs, &c.

Though no stress could be laid upon such extravagant assertions proceeding undoubtedly from ignorance, yet they fully answered the purpose of ministry at this time, viz. procrastination, and preventing the disagreeable truths above-mentioned from striking the minds of the public too forcibly. The event of this inquiry, however, encouraged General Burgoyne to insist for an examination of his conduct; which indeed had been so unmercifully censured, that even the ministers began to think he had suffered too much, and that he ought to be allowed to vindicate himself. He was accordingly permitted to bring witnesses in his own behalf; and from the most respectable evidence it appeared that he had acted the part, as occasion required, both of a general and soldier; that the attachment of his army to him was so great, that no dangers or difficulties could shake it; and that, even when all their patience and courage were found to be ineffectual, they were still ready to obey his commands, and die with arms in their hands. A great number of other particulars relating to his expedition were also cleared up entirely to the honour of the general, and several charges against him were totally refuted. It appeared, however, that the Americans, far from being the contemptible enemy they had been called, were intrepid and resolute. On the whole, it was remarked by a great number of the most judicious people in the nation, that the spirit of defamation, which for some time had been so prevalent, must at last produce the most fatal effects; by depriving the nation of its best officers, through the aversion that would be produced in them, both in the sea and land departments, to enter into a service where they were certain of being calumniated.

After the resignation of Admiral Keppel, the command of the Channel fleet was bestowed, though not deracery without violent debates, on Sir Charles Hardy, a brave and faithful Briton. and experienced officer, but now advanced in years, and who had retired from the service with a design of never returning to it, being at that time governor of Greenwich hospital. The choice of an admiral to command this fleet was now of the greatest importance, on account of the accession of Spain to the general confederacy which took place this year*. The quarrel, like that with France, was formally intimated by the Spanish minister on the 17th of June 1779; and like that also was attended with new but ineffectual proposals of an accommodation with America, and removal of the ministry. The imminent danger, however, to which the nation was now exposed, required a vigorous exertion, and various projects for its internal defence were laid before the parliament. The principal of these were the raising of volunteer companies to be added to the regiments of militia belonging to the counties where they were raised, and the augmenting the number of militia. The latter was judged unadvisable, on account of the necessity there would be to send a great number of regular forces out of the kingdom, which would require new supplies of recruits; and the increase of the militia might prove detrimental to the recruiting service. The spirit and magnanimity displayed on this occasion, however, did the highest honour to the national character, and fully justified the opinion generally entertained of its opulence and valour. All parts of the kingdom seemed actuated by a laudable zeal to concur in every measure necessary for its defence; large sums were subscribed by people of rank and affluence; and companies were raised, and regiments formed, with such alacrity, as quickly banished all apprehensions for the safety of the kingdom.

On the other hand, the French, now thinking themselves secure of victory by the accession of the whole strength of Spain to their cause, began to extend their plans of conquest. A squadron was fitted out under the command of the marquis de Vaudreuil, destined to reinforce the fleet commanded by D'Eistaing. But before its proceeding thither, an attack was made on the British settlements on the rivers Senegal and Gambia in Africa. These were easily conquered; and on this occasion the French quitted their own island of Goree, which was very soon after taken possession of by Sir Edward Hughes in his way to the East Indies. These unimportant and distant conquests, however, being insufficient to produce any great effect, it was resolved to strike a blow nearer home, by the conquest of Jersey and Guernsey. An attempt was accordingly made; but with so little success, that not a single man could be disembarked on the island they intended to conquer. The enterprise, however, proved indirectly of great service to the cause of America. A fleet of 400 merchantmen and transports was at that time on the point of sailing for New York, under the conduct of Admiral Arbuthnot; but that officer, being informed of the attack on Jersey, thought it his duty to come to the assistance of the island rather than proceed on his voyage. This delay was followed by another, occasioned by bad weather; so that the fleet, which was laden with warlike stores and necessaries, did not arrive till the end of August, and several important enterprises projected by Sir Henry Clinton were of course laid aside.

Vol. IV. Part II.

The French, in the meantime, determined to make a second attempt on Jersey; but their squadron, attacked by another under Sir James Wallace, was driven ashore in a small bay on the coast of Normandy, under cover of a battery. Thither they were pursued by the British commander, who silenced the battery, destroyed by took a large frigate of 34 guns, with two rich prizes, Sir James and burned two other frigates and several other vessels.

Thus disappointed in their attempt on Jersey, a pro-Invasion of object was formed of invading Great Britain itself; and Great Britain preparations for it, whether serious or not, were formidable, that they very justly excited a considerable alarm in this country. Not only were the best troops in the French service marched down to the coasts of the British channel, but transports were provided in great numbers, and many general officers promoted; the commanders also who were to have the charge of this important expedition were named by government. A junction was formed betwixt the French and Spanish fleets, in spite of the endeavours used on the part of the British to prevent it; and then the allies made their appearance in the British seas with upwards of 60 ships of the line, besides a vast of the combined fleets.

All this formidable apparatus, however, ended in nothing more than the taking of a single ship, the Ardent, of 64 guns. They had passed the British fleet single ship, under Sir Charles Hardy in the mouth of the Channel without observing him. Sailing then along the coast of England, they came in sight of Plymouth, where they took the Ardent, as has been already mentioned; after which they returned, without making the least attempt to land anywhere. The British admiral made good his entrance, without opposition, into the Channel, on their quitting it, which a strong easterly wind obliged them to do. He endeavoured to entice them up the Channel in pursuit of him; but the great sickness and mortality on board their ships, as they gave out, obliged them to retire, in order to repair their ships, and recruit the health of their people. Thus ended the first, and indeed the greatest, exploit performed by the combined fleets in the British seas. An annual parade of a similar kind was afterwards kept up, which was as formally opposed on the part of the British; but not the least act of hostility was ever committed by either of the Channel fleets against each other.

Though this ill success, or rather pusillanimity, manifest in the conduct of the combined fleets, was such that the French themselves were ashamed of it, the appearance of them in the Channel furnished opposition with abundance of matter for declamation. All ranks of men, indeed, now began to be wearied of the American war; and even those who had formerly been the most languid in defence of coercive measures, rally now began to be convinced of their inutility. The dreary, calamitous effects produced by the continuation of these measures, indeed, had by this time rendered the far greater part of the people exceedingly averse to them; and the almost universal wish was, that the oppressive burden of the American war should be cast off, and the whole national strength exerted against those whom, on account of our frequent contests with them, we had been accustomed to call our natural enemies. For this purpose the national spirit continued to be exerted with unabated vigour. Large sums were subscribed in the several counties, and employed in raising volunteers, and forming them into independent companies; associations were also formed in the towns, where the inhabitants bestowed a considerable portion of their time in training themselves to the use of arms. The East India Company now forgot their quarrels with ministry, and not only presented government with a sum sufficient for levying 6000 seamen, but at its own cost added three 74 gun ships to the navy. Administration were not yet, however, weary of the plans they had laid down, and which they seemed inclined to prosecute, and indeed did prosecute, as long as the nation would support them. The virulence of opposition, therefore, still continued; and what was worse, every part of the kingdom seemed to imbibe their sentiments.

Among other charges now brought against them was that of misapplying the national force. An hundred thousand men were employed for the internal defence of the kingdom; which being much more than sufficient for the purpose, ought therefore to have been distributed into places where it might have acted to advantage. The army of Great Britain, it was said, now amounted to 300,000 men; the navy to 300 sail, including frigates and armed vessels; twenty millions had been expended on the service of the year 1779: and yet, with all this force and treasure, the utmost boast that ministers could make was, that the enemy had been hitherto kept at bay, and not allowed to invade Great Britain. Nor were the charges less heavy in other respects. Veteran officers had been called by to make room for those of inferior merit. The discontented and miserable state of Ireland*, the losses of the West India islands, &c., were all put to the account of ministers; and it was said, that the universal cry of the nation was for their dilution. Their incapacity was now visible to everybody; and it was a matter of universal surprize how they durst retain their places in opposition to the general desire of the nation.

To all this ministry replied in a resolute and determined manner, denying or refusing every circumstance; and at last, after violent debates, gained their point of an address without any amendment proposing their removal, in the upper house by 82 to 41, and in the lower by 253 to 134. The enormous expense already incurred, however, and hereafter to be incurred, for the carrying on of the war, occasioned such a general alarm, that it was no longer possible to refuse compliance with some scheme of economy, or at least giving it a patient hearing. The duke of Richmond proposed that the crown should set the example, and moved for an address to this purpose; but the motion was lost by 77 to 36. The earl of Shelburne next undertook the discussion of the subject; and having, in a most elaborate speech, compared the expenses of former times with the present, and shown the immense disparity, he proceeded to show the reasons. These were, that ministers formerly employed fewer persons, and obliged them to be content with smaller profits. One contractor supplied all the troops in America during the last war, and his agreement was to furnish a ration of provisions at sixpence; but so different was the management now, that the ration of provisions, instead of sixpence, cost two shillings. One person only had enjoyed contracts to the amount of 1,300,000l.; 3,700,000l. had passed through the hands of another contractor to be transmitted to America: but no voucher had been given for the expenditure of this immense sum; the accounts being contained in a few lines, accounting for 20,000l. in one line, 30,000l. in another, &c. Thus, he said, the ministry acquired a most unbounded and unconstitutional influence; and having the dangerous power of expending the national treasure without any check, corruption and venality everywhere abounded. He moved, therefore, that the expenditure of those vast sums annually sunk in extraordinary expenses should be brought under some control; and that to extend the public expenses beyond the sums granted by parliament, was an invasion of its peculiar and exclusive rights.

Though this motion of the earl of Shelburne's, and some others of a similar tendency, were rejected on solid principles according to the ministry, the minds of the people were far from being conciliated to their views. Instead of this, the opinion began to be General, that ministers exercised an unconstitutional influence over the representatives, and that such influence was very much augmented within these few years, it was now supposed by numbers of people, that nothing short of a change in the constitution of parliament could remedy the evil complained of. To produce this purpose a petition was framed in the city of York, number of the most respectable people in the county had assembled, and delegated 61 gentlemen as a committee to manage the correspondence necessary for carrying on the designs, and forming an association to support and promote it. In the present petition it was set forth, that, in consequence of the war in which the nation was involved, the public debt was greatly augmented, taxes increased, and trade and manufactures much affected. The profusion attending the war was complained of; and parliament was requested, previous to the raising of any new taxes, to inquire into, and correct the abuse of expenditure in the public money; to reduce exorbitant emoluments, abolish sinecure places and unmerited pensions, and apply the produce to the exigencies of the state. This petition was followed by others of a similar kind from 27 of the principal counties, and most of the large towns in England. The most severe and opprobrious language was used in the county-meetings with regard to the ministry and parliament. The latter were represented as void of all principle, ready to sacrifice both conscience and reputation to the will of those in power; and, in short, bound by no ties but those of the most sordid interest; ready on all occasions to enrich themselves by the spoils of their country; and persons to whom the honour or interest of the kingdom were matters of no consideration. The court, on the other hand, was looked upon as the receptacle of every one who harboured ill designs against the people of Britain, and where nobody stood any chance of advancing himself but by adulation and extreme servility.

The emissaries of America and the other enemies of Great Britain are said to have been active in fomenting these discord, which at this period arose to a height unknown for a century past. The ministry, however, however, continued firm and undaunted. Previous to the taking of any of the petitions into consideration, they insisted on going through the business of the supply, by determining the ways and means; nor did either the number of English petitions, or an additional one from the island of Jamaica setting forth the extreme danger that island was in, make them alter their resolution in the least.

At last, in the beginning of February 1780, a plan was brought forward by Mr Burke, for securing the independency of parliament, and introducing economy into the various departments of government. This plan, among other things, proposed the abolition of the offices of treasurer, comptroller, and cofferer of the household; treasurer of the chamber, master of the household, the board of green cloth, with several other places under the steward of the household; the great and removing wardrobe, the jewel office, the robes, board of works, and the civil branch of the board of ordnance. Other reformations were also proposed; but though the temper of the times obliged the ministry to admit the bills, and even to pretend an approbation of the plan, he meant nothing less than to admit it in its full extent, or indeed in any part, if it could possibly be prevented. When the plan, therefore, which he had approved in general, came to be particularly considered, he was found to be determined against every part of it. The general temper of the people, without doors, however, seemed now to have affected many of the members of parliament, and made them desert their old standard. An economical plan proposed in the house of lords by the earl of Shelburne was rejected only by a majority of 101 to 55. This was the strongest opposition that had appeared in that house for many years; but in the lower house matters still went worse. The first proposition in Mr Burke's plan was to abolish the office of secretary of state for the colonies; and the utmost efforts of administration could preserve this office only by a majority of 208 to 201. The board of trade was abolished by 207 to 198; but this was the only defeat sustained by ministry at present; all the rest of the plan being rejected excepting only one clause, by which it was determined that the offices of lieutenant and ensign, &c., belonging to the yeomen of the guards, should not any longer be sold, but given to officers in the army and navy on half pay, and of 15 years standing in their respective lines of service.

This ill success was very mortifying to Mr Burke, who had expected to save more than a million annually to the nation. Administration, however, had still a greater defeat to meet with than what they had experienced in the abolition of the board of trade. The 6th of April was the day appointed for taking into consideration the numerous petitions, from half the kingdom of England, already mentioned. They were introduced by Mr Dunning; who, in a very elaborate speech, set forth the many attempts that had been made to introduce reformation and economy into the plans of government. These had been defeated by ministerial artifice, or overthrown by mere dint of numbers; he concluded, therefore, and moved as a resolution of the house, That the influence of the crown had increased, was increasing, and ought to be diminished. This motion being carried after a long and violent debate, he next moved, that the house of commons was as competent to examine into and correct abuses in the expenditure of the civil list as in any other branch of the public revenue. To this another was added by Mr Thomas Pitt, That it was the duty of the house to provide an immediate and effectual redress of the abuses complained of in the petitions. The ministry now requested that nothing farther might be done that night; but such was the temper of the house, that both these motions were carried without a division; after which they were read a first and second time, and agreed to without a division.

Ministry had never received such a complete defeat nor ever been treated with so much alacrity of language. The news of the proceedings of the day were received by the people at large with as much joy as if the most complete victory over a foreign enemy had been announced. Opposition, however, though matters of the field at present, did not imagine they had obtained any permanent victory, and therefore resolved to make the most of the advantages they had gained. It was moved by Mr Dunning at the next meeting, that to ascertain the independence of parliament, and remove all suspicions of its being under undue influence, there should, every session, seven days after the meeting of parliament, be laid before that house an account of all the sums issued out of the civil list, or any other branch of the revenue, since the last receipt, in favour of any of its members. This passed with little difficulty; but when he moved that the treasurers of the chamber and household, the cofferer, comptroller, and master of the household, with the clerks of the green cloth, and their deputies, should be excluded from having seats in the house, a warm debate ensued, and the motion was carried only by 215 against 273. This was the last triumph of the popular party; their next joint motion, for the exclusion of revenue officers, being thrown out by 224 against 195. A last effort was made, by Mr Dunning's proposal of an address to the throne against proroguing or dissolving the parliament, until measures had been taken to prevent the improper influence complained of in the petitions. On this occasion the debates were long and violent; but the motion was lost by 254 against 203. Ministry would gladly have screened their friends from the vengeance of opposition; alleging the lateness of the hour, it being then past midnight. The speaker of the house, however, perceiving Mr Fox about to rise, insisted that the house should remain sitting; and thus the deserters from the popular party were condemned to hear their conduct set forth in such terms as perhaps were never applied on any other occasion to members of the British senate.

This last victory of administration confirmed the disaffection and ill opinion which the people had conceived of the majority of their representatives. It was seen in the height of that ill temper which the conduct of parliament had created in the multitude, that those bill discontents broke out which were so near involving the kingdom in universal desolation. The hardships under which individuals professing the Roman Catholic persuasion had laboured for many years in England, had lately awakened the consideration of the liberal minded. The inutility and impropriety of persecuting people from whom no danger was apprehended, and who were not suspected of disaffection to the civil constitution of this country, induced several persons of rank and influence to undertake the procuring them relief.

The calamities of the times had afforded the English Roman Catholics a very proper occasion to manifest their attachment to government. They presented a most loyal and dutiful address to the king, containing the strongest assurances of affection and fidelity to his person and the civil government of this country.

"Our exclusion (said they) from many of the benefits of that constitution, has not diminished our reverence for it. We behold with satisfaction the felicity of our fellow subjects; and we partake of the general prosperity which results from an institution so full of wisdom. We have patiently submitted to such restrictions and discouragements as the legislature thought expedient. We have thankfully received such relaxations of the rigour of the laws, as the mildness of an enlightened age, and the benignity of the British government have gradually produced; and we submissively wait, without presuming to fidget either time or measure, for such other indulgence as those happy causes cannot fail in their own season to effect.

"We beg leave to assure your majesty, that our dissent from the legal establishment in matters of religion is purely conscientious; that we hold no opinions adverse to your majesty's government, or repugnant to the duties of good citizens; and we trust that this has been shown more decisively by our irreproachable conduct for many years past, under circumstances of public discomfiture and displeasure, than it can be manifested by any declaration whatever.

"In a time of public danger, when your majesty's subjects can have but one interest, and ought to have but one wish and one sentiment, we think it our duty to assure your majesty of our unreserved affection to your government, of our unalterable attachment to the cause and welfare of this our common country, and our utter detestation of the designs and views of any foreign power against the dignity of your crown, and the safety and tranquillity of your subjects.

"The delicacy of our situation is such, that we do not presume to point out the particular means by which we may be allowed to testify our zeal to your majesty, and our wishes to serve our country; but we entreat leave faithfully to assure your majesty, that we shall be perfectly ready, on every occasion, to give such proofs of our fidelity, and the purity of our intentions, as your majesty's wisdom and the sense of the nation shall at any time deem expedient."

This address was presented to the king on the first day of May 1778, and was signed by the duke of Norfolk, the earls of Surrey and Shrewsbury, the lords Stourton, Petre, Arundel, Dormer, Teynham, Clifford, and Linton; and by 163 commoners of rank and fortune.

The only obstacle that stood in the way of their wishes was, the difficulty of overcoming the prejudices of the lower classes, who would probably disapprove and condemn the indulgence shown to the people of a persuasion which they had been taught to look upon with horror and detestation. But notwithstanding the professions of the vulgar, it was determined by several individuals of generous and liberal sentiments, to espouse their cause as far as it could be done consistently with the principles of the constitution and the general temper of the times. Their being patronized by some of the principal leaders in opposition, was a circumstance greatly in their favour; as it showed that those who professed to be the most strenuous friends to the freedom and constitution of this country, did not imagine they would be endangered by treating the Roman Catholics with more lenity than they had hitherto experienced.

About the middle of May, Sir George Savile made a motion for the repeal of some penalties enacted against them. He grounded his motion on the necessity of vindicating the honour and asserting the true principles of the Protestant religion, of which the peculiar merit was to admit of no persecution. It ill became the professors of such a religion to be guilty of that intolerance with which they reproached others. The statutes he meant to repeal were such as gave occasion to deeds that debased and were a disgrace to human nature, by inciting relations to divest themselves of the feelings of humanity, and by encouraging the rapacity of informers.

He represented the address above quoted as a full proof of the loyal disposition of the Roman Catholics, and as an unfeigned testimony of the soundness of their political principles. In order, however, to silence the objections of those who might suspect them of duplicity, a test was proposed of so binding and solemn a nature, that no man could be supposed to imagine that any authority could annul its efficacy.

The pains and penalties of the statutes to be repealed were laid before the house by Mr Dunning. By these statutes it was made felony in a foreign clergyman of the Roman communion, and high treason in one that was a native of this kingdom, to teach the doctrines or perform divine service according to the rites of that church; the estates of persons educated abroad in that persuasion were forfeited to the next Protestant heir; a son or any other nearest relation, being a Protestant, was empowered to take possession of his own father's, or nearest of kin's estate, during their lives; a Roman Catholic was disabled from acquiring any legal property by purchase.

The mildness of the British government did not indeed countenance the practice of the severities enacted by these statutes; but still the prospect of gain subjected every man of the Roman persuasion to the ill usage of informers; as on their evidence the magistrates were bound, however unwilling, to carry these cruel laws into execution.

In consequence of these representations, the motion made in favour of the Roman Catholics was received without one dissenting voice; and a bill in pursuance to its intent was brought in and passed both houses. The test or oath by which they were bound, was conceived in the strongest and most expressive terms. They were enjoined to swear allegiance to the king's person and family, and to abjure especially the pretensions to the crown assumed by the person called Charles III. They were to declare their disbelief and detestation of the following positions: That it is lawful to put individuals to death on pretence of their being heretics; that no faith is to be kept with heretics; that princes excommunicated by the pope and council, or by the fee of Rome, or any other authority, may be deposed or murdered by their subjects or by any others; that the pope of Rome, or any other foreign prelate or sovereign, is entitled to any temporal or civil jurisdiction or pre-eminence, either directly or indirectly, in this kingdom. They were solemnly to profess, that they made the aforesaid declarations with the utmost sincerity, and in the strictest and plainest meaning of the words and language of the test, without harbouring any secret persuasion that any dispensation from Rome, or any other authority, could acquit or absolve them from the obligation contracted by this oath, or declare it null and void.

The indulgence shown to the Roman Catholics in England, encouraged those of the same persuasion in Scotland to hope for a similar relief. Several gentlemen of that nation of great rank and character, and who were members of parliament, expressed their warmest wishes that it should be extended to their country; and declared their intention to bring in a bill for that purpose the following session. The design was approved by the general assembly of the church of Scotland; who rejected, by a majority of no less than 100, a remonstrance that had been proposed against it. In consequence of these flattering appearances, a petition was prepared for parliament on behalf of the Roman Catholics in Scotland. But these expectations were soon damped. A pamphlet was published against the doctrine and professors of the Popish religion, which represented them as the common foes to mankind and the disturbers of all states; and this being circulated among all classes, raised a number of enemies to the intended petition.

The opposition was at first chiefly conducted by some persons at Edinburgh, who assumed the title of Committee for the Protestant Interest; and under that denomination carried on a correspondence with all those who coincided with their opinions, and who formed a very large proportion of the common people in Scotland. As the committee at Edinburgh, from its residence in the capital of the kingdom, was deemed to consist of persons of the first importance, it directed in a manner the motions of all the others.

The persons who made up this committee, however, acted from no mean or mercenary views: they aimed only at the preservation of the Protestant religion, and the liberties of their country; both which they conceived were in danger, from the indulgence of government to individuals of the Roman Catholic persuasion.

Actuated by these ideas, they exerted themselves with so much activity, that the principal gentlemen of the Catholic persuasion thought it requisite for their safety to convey an intimation to the British ministry, that they were desirous to drop the application they had proposed to make for an indulgence similar to that which had been granted to their fellow-subjects in England of the same communion.

They published also in the newspapers the representation they had made to ministry; hoping thereby to convince the public, that they were sincerely desirous to remove any cause of dissatisfaction on their own account, and to submit to any inconvenience sooner than occasion disturbance. But matters were now gone too far to be conciliated by any means.

On the 2d day of February 1779, the populace met according to appointment, in order to carry into execution the various projects they had in contemplation. They began by an attack upon a house inhabited by a Roman Catholic bishop, with others of his persuasion, and which contained a place of worship. They committed it to the flames. They destroyed in the same manner another house that had also a chapel; after which they proceeded to vent their resentment on several individuals of that persuasion by burning their effects.

The next objects of their vengeance were those who had patronized the Roman Catholics. They beset the houses of Dr Robertson and Mr Crofton; but, on hearing of the intentions of the rioters, the friends of both came to their assistance in such numbers, and so well prepared to repel the fury of the populace, that they did not dare to exercise the violence they had premeditated.

This disappointment, which was accompanied by farther precautions against their malevolent designs, put an end to the attempts of the mob at Edinburgh. But the spirit of dissatisfaction at the indulgence intended to the Roman Catholics still remained in full force. Ministry was held out as harbouring a secret determination to undermine the Protestant religion, and to introduce Popery; and loaded in consequence with the most outrageous invectives.

By degrees the same ungovernable spirit was communicated to part of the English nation. The cry against Popery became daily more loud among the inferior classes; and that inveteracy which had subsided during so many years, began to revive in as powerful a degree, as if the nation were actually under the impending terrors of persecution. To this were added the secret fears of others; who still imagined it was not inconsistent with good policy to discourage a religion, from the professors of which so much danger had accrued to the constitution of this country in former times. These, though adverse to all acts of violence, thought it necessary to keep alive the antipathy to it, and by no means to show the least willingness to grant any further indulgence than it had hitherto experienced.

From this motive they were of opinion, that a suspension of the laws enacted against it, though tacit and unauthorized, was sufficient to remove all complaints of harshness and oppression on the part of the Roman Catholics; and they looked upon the penal statutes as a requisite bar to confine them within the bounds of submission, and fear of offending.

Thus a society was formed in London, which took the title of the Protestant Association, of which Lord George Gordon, who had rendered himself conspicuous in Scotland by his opposition to the repeal, was elected president; and it now prepared to act in a decisive manner against the resolutions of the legislature.

On the 29th of May 1780, the associators held a meeting in order to settle in what manner they should present a petition to the house of commons against the repeal of the penal statutes. A long speech was made on this occasion by their president, who represented the Roman persuasion as gaining ground rapidly in this country; that the only method of stopping its progress, was to go up with a spirited remonstrance to their their representatives, and to tell them in plain and resolute terms that they were determined to preserve their religious freedom with their lives, &c.

This harangue being received with the loudest applause, he moved, that the whole body of the association should meet on the 2d day of June in St George's Fields, at ten in the morning, to accompany him to the house of commons on the delivery of the petition. This being unanimously assented to, he informed them, that if he found himself attended by fewer than 20,000, he would not present the petition. He then directed they should form themselves into four divisions; the first, second, and third, to consist of those who belonged to the City, Westminster, and Southwark; the fourth of the Scotch residents in London. They were, by way of distinction, to wear blue cockades in their hats.

Three days previous to the presentation of the petition, he gave notice of it to the house, and acquainted it with the manner in which it was to be presented; but this was received with as much indifference and unconcern as all his former intimations.

On the 2d day of June, according to appointment, about 50 or 60,000 men assembled in St George's Fields. They drew up in four separate divisions, as had been agreed, and proceeded to the parliament house, with Lord George Gordon at their head. An immense roll of parchment was carried before them, containing the names of those who had signed the petition.

On their way to the house, they behaved with great peaceableness and decency; but as soon as they were arrived, great disturbances took place. The rioters began by compelling all the members of both houses they met with, to put blue cockades in their hats, and call out, "No Popery." They forced some to take an oath that they would vote for the repeal of the Popery act, as they styled it. They treated others with great indignity, posting themselves in all the avenues to both houses; the doors of which they twice endeavoured to break open.

Their rage was chiefly directed against the members of the house of lords; several of whom narrowly escaped with their lives.

During these disturbances, Lord George Gordon moved for leave to bring up the petition. This was readily granted; but when he proposed it should be taken into immediate consideration, it was strenuously opposed by almost the whole house. Enraged at this opposition, he came out several times to the people during the debates, acquainting them how adverse the house appeared to grant their petition, and naming particularly those who had spoken against it.

Several members of the house expostulated with him in the warmest terms on the unjustifiableness of his conduct; and one of his relations, Colonel Gordon, threatened to run him through, the moment any of the rioters should force their entrance into the house. It was some hours before the house could carry on its deliberations with any regularity, which was not done till the members were relieved by the arrival of a party of the guards. Order being restored, the business of the petition was resumed; when Lord George Gordon told them it had been signed by near 120,000 British Protestant subjects. He therefore insisted that the petition should be considered without delay. But notwithstanding the dangers with which they were menaced, and the proof which the mover of the petition had given that no means should be left unemployed to compel them to grant it, the commons continued immovable in their determination. Of 200 members, then present in the house, six only voted for it.

In the mean time the mob had dispersed itself into various parts of the metropolis, where they demolished two Roman chapels belonging to foreign ministers; and openly vented the most terrible menaces against all people of that persuasion.

On the 4th of June they assembled in great numbers in the eastern parts of London; and attacked the chapels and houses of the Roman Catholics in that quarter, stripping them of their contents, which they threw into the street, and committed to the flames.

They renewed their outrages on the following day, destroying several Roman chapels, and demolishing the house of Sir George Saville, in resentment of his having brought into parliament the bill in favour of the Roman Catholics.

Next day both houses met as usual; but finding that no business could be done, they adjourned to the 19th.

During this day and the following, which were the 6th and 7th of June, the rioters were absolute masters of the metropolis and its environs.

Some of those who had been concerned in the demolition of the chapels belonging to foreign ministers, having been seized and sent to Newgate, the mob collected before that prison, and demanded their immediate release. On being refused, they proceeded to throw firebrands and all manner of combustibles into the keeper's house; which unhappily communicated the fire to the whole building; so that this immense pile was soon in flames. In this scene of confusion, the prisoners were all released. They amounted to about 300; among whom several were under sentence of death. They set fire, in the same manner, to the King's Bench and Fleet prisons, and to a number of houses belonging to Roman Catholics. The terror occasioned by these incendiaries was such that most people hung out of their windows pieces of blue silk, which was the colour assumed by the rioters; and chalked on their doors and shutters the words, "No Popery," by way of signifying they were friendly to their cause.

The night of the 7th of June concluded these horrors. No less than 36 different conflagrations were counted at the same time. The bank had been threatened, and was twice assailed: but happily was too well guarded for their attempts. In the evening, large bodies of troops arrived from all parts, and came in time to put a stop to the progress of the rioters. They fell upon them everywhere, and multitudes were slain and wounded, besides the numbers that perished through intoxication. It was not until the afternoon of the 8th, that people began to recover from their consternation. During great part of the day the disorders of the preceding night had created so terrible an alarm, that the shops were almost universally shut up over all London. The melancholy effects of misguided zeal were not, however, confined solely to London. The outrageous disposition of the populace was preparing to act the like horrid scenes in other parts of England. The mob rose in Hull, Bristol, and Bath; but through the timely interposition of the magistracy, these places were saved from their fury.

On the subsiding of this violent and unexpected commotion, it was thought proper to secure Lord George Gordon. He was arrested, and committed close prisoner to the Tower, after having undergone a long examination before the principal lords of the council.

On the 19th of June, both houses met again according to adjournment. A speech was made on this occasion from the throne, acquainting them with the measures that had been taken in consequence of the disturbances, and assuring them of the utmost readiness to concur in whatever could contribute to the safety and maintenance of the laws and liberties of the people. The speech was highly approved; but the conduct of administration was severely censured, and charged with unpardonable neglect for not calling forth the civil power, and employing the military in due time to obviate the mischiefs that had been committed. Ministry excused itself, from the want of sufficient strength to answer all the demands of affluence that were made during the riots, and the absolute impossibility of suppressing them till the arrival of troops from the country. The various petitions were now taken into consideration that had been presented for the repeal of the act which had occasioned the riots; but the house continued in the same mind. Nevertheless it was thought proper to yield somewhat to the prejudices of the people, by passing a bill for preventing persons of the Popish persuasion from teaching or educating the children of Protestants; but this was afterwards thrown out by the lords.

Nothing could have happened more opportunely for the present ministry than the riots just now related; for such were the alarm and terror occasioned by them, that the ardour which had appeared for promoting popular meetings and associations, and for opposing the measures of government, was in a great degree suppressed. The county meetings were represented as having a tendency, like the Protestant Association, to bring on insurrections and rebellions. Many began to consider all popular meetings as extremely dangerous; and among the commercial and moneyed people, there was not an inconsiderable number, who were so panic-struck by the late riots, that all attention to the principles of the constitution was overruled by their extreme anxiety about the preservation of their property. Had it not been for these events, though the minister was again at the head of a majority in parliament, it is probable that the spirit of opposition which prevailed in the different counties would have compelled administration to make some concessions to the people. But these transactions extremely strengthened the hands of administration, and rendered the exertions of the popular leaders less formidable. The popular party were also somewhat weakened, by the diffusions which took place among them in the county meetings, and assemblies of that kind, relative to annual parliaments and other political regulations which were proposed to be adopted.

In the suppression of these riots, however, the interference of the military without the command of the civil magistrate became a matter of suspicion to the people at large. In the house of lords the duke of Richmond expressed an expectation that some of his majesty's ministers would rise, and give their lordships assurances, that the measures taken in order to suppress the riots, which were defendible only upon the ground of necessity, would be so stated; and that what was illegally done, on the ground of necessity, would be cured by an act of indemnity.

Various other observations were thrown out relative to the king's prerogative and military law: upon which Lord Mansfield observed, that neither the king's prerogative nor military law had any thing to do with the conduct of government in their endeavours to quell the late outrages. All men, of all ranks, descriptions, and denominations, were bound, by their oath of allegiance, to interpose for the prevention of acts of high treason, or felony, wherever any attempts to perpetrate such crimes were made in their presence; and were criminal, if they did not do it. In the whole of these proceedings, therefore, the military had not acted in their technical capacity as military, but had merely exercised their duty as civil men, which they, in common with other civil men, had both a right and an obligation to exercise. When a body of men were convened, without proceeding to the actual perpetration of treasonable or felonious acts, then, by a clause in the riot-act, the presence of the civil magistrate was necessary, before the military could interpose at all; and for this reason, that as no acts of felony were committed, they could have no plea in the civil character for meddling at all. But by the statute law of the country, it became felonious in any combination of men to persevere in that combination, after the riot-act had been read by a justice of the peace; and this being done, then, and not till then, they had a constitutional reason for their interposition; namely, the privilege and duty of hindering the commission of felony, whenever they had it in their power. This being, therefore, the plain voice of the law, his lordship did not see how any prerogative of the king had been exercised, nor how military law had been established. Nothing had been done out of the regular course of the law, and no power had been assumed by the soldiery, which they did not possess as civil individuals, and not in their technical capacity as members of the military.

This doctrine was far from being agreeable to the nation in general, and was very freely censured both in newspapers and pamphlets. It was admitted, that if soldiery came accidentally, as individuals, to any place where felonies were committing, they might interfere, as well as others of the king's subjects, in the prevention of them. But this was a different case from that of bodies of armed troops being sent under officers commissioned by the king, and with orders to act against riotous and disorderly persons without any authority from the civil magistrate. It was maintained that the constitution of England knew no such character as a mercenary soldiery, at the sole will of the executive power. Soldiers were held to their duty by laws which affected no other part of the community: and no soldiery, as such, could be employed in the service of the constitution, without a particular act of parliament in his favour. The idea that a military ilitary man was convertible into a folder, or a citizen, as royalty might move its sceptre, was a novel idea, and only made for the present occasion. Mercenary armies were understood to consist of men, who had either detached themselves or been forced from civil societies. Laws were made on those suppositions, regarding their liberties and lives, such as no members of civil society could submit to. Soldiers were only tolerated by annual bills, and under repeated pretences; and the very idea of blending them with the common subjects of the state, and giving persons of their description a right of judging on its most important occurrences, would have filled our ancestors with horror. The laws tolerated an army for certain periods, and under certain restrictions; but there was no law which admitted the interference of the military in any of the operations of civil government.

It was acknowledged, that the late atrocious riots had rendered an extraordinary exertion of power absolutely necessary; but it was at the same time contended, that the interference of the army in those outrages, without any authority from the civil magistrate, was an act of prerogative unconstitutional and illegal, though perfectly feasible and beneficial. The public safety and benefit might sometimes excuse exertions of power, which would be injurious and tyrannical on ordinary occasions: but the utmost care should be taken, that such extraordinary exertions should not be established as precedents, which might operate very fatally to the constitution. An act of indemnity to the ministry, therefore, on account of the necessity of the case, should be immediately passed. But if a large standing army was kept up, and the king was understood to be invested with a power of ordering the troops to act discretionally, whenever he should judge proper, without any authority from the civil magistrate, the people could have no possible security for their liberties. In vain might be their appeals to the courts of justice: for the efficacy of appeals of that kind, in such cases, would depend on the pleasure of the prince.

Many were filled with similar apprehensions, and alarmed at the dangerous precedent which the late exertions of the military afforded, however necessary they might be from the very singular circumstances of the case. Among others, Sir George Saville, in an address to his constituents some time afterwards, declared, that he considered them as "fully, effectually, and absolutely under the discretion and power of a military force, which was to act without waiting for the authority of the civil magistrates."

A letter written by Lord Amberst to Lieutenant-colonel Twifleton, who commanded the troops employed in London for the suppression of the riots, and which was understood to be an order for disarming the citizens, was much canvassed in both houses of parliament. The letter, however, was denied to have such a meaning, and was said to be levelled only at disorderly persons who were found in arms. It excited, nevertheless, no inconsiderable alarm; and was an inducement, added to the consideration of the late riots, to lead a great number of citizens to provide themselves with arms, and to join in plans of military association, that they might be enabled to protect themselves and the city from violence and outrage, without any future interference of the military.

We must now proceed to a detail of the operations of the war, which, notwithstanding the powerful confederacy against Great Britain, seemed rather to be in her favour than otherwise. The Spaniards had begun their military operations with the siege of Gibraltar, but with very little success*; and the close of the year 1779, and beginning of 1780, were attended with some considerable naval advantages to Great Britain. On the 18th of December 1779, the fleet under the command of Sir Hyde Parker in the West Indies captured nine sail of French merchant ships, which, with several others, were under the convoy of some ships of war. Two days after he detached Rear Admiral Rowley in pursuit of three large French ships, of which he had received intelligence, and which were supposed to be part of Monf. la Mothe Piquet's squadron returning from Grenada. His success there has been already mentioned; and about the same time several other vessels were taken by the same squadron commanded by Sir Hyde Parker.

On the 8th of January 1780, Sir George Brydges Rodney, who had been intrusted with the command of a fleet, one object of the delineation of which was the relief of Gibraltar, fell in with 22 sail of Spanish ships, and in a few hours the whole fleet was taken.

In little more than a week after, the same fortunate admiral met with still more signal success. On the 16th of the month he engaged, near Cape St Vincent, a Spanish fleet, consisting of 11 ships of the line and two frigates, under Don Juan de Langara. The Spaniards made a gallant defence; but four of their largest ships were taken, and carried into Gibraltar. These were, the Phoenix of 80 guns and 700 men, on board of which was the admiral, Don Juan de Langara: the Monarca, of 70 guns and 600 men, Don Antonio Oyarvide commander; the Princesa, of 70 guns and 600 men, Don Manuel de Leon commander; and the Diligente, of 70 guns and 600 men, Don Antonio Abarnoz commander. Two other 70 gun ships were also taken; but one of them was driven on shore on the breakers and lost, and the other was likewise driven on shore, but afterwards recovered. Four ships of the line escaped, and the two frigates: but two of the former were much damaged in the action; in the course of which one Spanish ship, the San Domingo, of 70 guns and 600 men, was blown up. The five men of war taken were remarkably fine ships; and were afterwards completely refitted, manned, and put into the English line of battle. The Spanish admiral and his officers applied to Sir George Rodney to obtain the liberty of returning to Spain upon their parole of honour: but this he declined for some time, because he was informed that a great number of British seamen were then prisoners in Spain, who ought to have been released. However, afterwards receiving assurances that these should be immediately set at liberty, he released the Spanish admiral and officers upon their parole; and the prisoners in general were treated with such generosity and humanity, as appeared to make a great impression upon the court of Madrid and the Spanish nation. When Admiral Rodney had supplied the garrison of Gibraltar with with provisions, ammunition, and money, he proceeded on his voyage to the West Indies; having sent home part of his fleet, with his Spanish prizes, under the command of Rear-Admiral Digby; who took a French man of war on his return, the Prothée, of 64 guns and 700 men.

On the 23rd of March there was an action in the West Indies, between some French and English men of war, the former under the command of Mons. de la Mothe Piquet, and the latter, being part of Sir Peter Parker's squadron, under that of Commodore Cornwallis. The engagement was maintained on both sides with great spirit; but the French at length gave up the contest, and made the best of their way for Cape François.

Admiral Rodney having arrived in the West Indies, and taken upon him the command of his majesty's ships at the Leeward islands, an action happened between him and the French fleet under the command of Count de Guichen, on the 17th of April. The British squadron consisted of 20 ships of the line, besides frigates; and the French fleet of 23 ships of the line, and several frigates. The action began a little before one, and continued till about a quarter after four in the afternoon. Admiral Rodney was on board the Sandwich, a 90 gun ship, which beat three of the French ships out of their line of battle, and entirely broke it. But such was at length the crippled condition of the Sandwich, and of several other ships, that it was impossible to pursue the French that night without the greatest disadvantage. The victory was, indeed, claimed on both sides; but no ship was taken on either: and the French retired to Guadeloupe. Admiral Rodney's ship, the Sandwich, had suffered so much, that for 24 hours she was with difficulty kept above water. Of the British there were killed in this engagement 120, and 353 were wounded.

On the 15th of May, another action happened between the same commanders. It did not commence till near seven in the evening, only a few ships having engaged, which were soon separated; and the whole ended in nothing decisive. Of the British 21 were killed, and 100 wounded. The fleets met again on the 19th of the same month, when another action ensued; but this also terminated without any material advantage on either side. In the last engagement 47 of the British were killed and 193 wounded. According to the French accounts, the total of their loss, in these three actions, amounted to 158 killed, and 820 wounded.

It was a very unfavourable circumstance for Great Britain, that the French should have so formidable a fleet in the West Indies: and this great force of the enemy was augmented in June, by being joined with a Spanish squadron near the island of Dominica. The French and Spanish fleets, when united, amounted to 36 sail of the line. They did not, however, attack any of the British islands, or even reconnoitre the fleet under the command of Sir George Brydges Rodney, which then lay at anchor in Gros Ilet bay. Such, indeed, were the vigilance and good conduct of that admiral, and so sensible were the inhabitants of these islands of his services, that the houses of assembly of St. Christophers and Nevis presented addresses to him, testifying their gratitude for the security they enjoyed in consequence of his spirited and feasible exertions.

In the month of June, Admiral Geary, who commanded the grand fleet, took twelve valuable merchant ships bound from Port au Prince to Bordeaux and other ports of France: But in the month of July a very important and unexpected capture was made by the Spaniards, which could not but excite much alarm in Great Britain. On the 8th of August, Captain Moutray, who had under his command the Ramillies of 74 guns and two frigates, with the trade bound for the East and West Indies under convoy, had the misfortune to fall in with the combined fleets of France and Spain, which had sailed from Cadiz the preceding day. The Ramillies and the two frigates escaped: but the rest were completely surrounded, that five East Indiamen were taken, and 50 merchant ships bound for the West Indies. Their cargoes were extremely valuable: it was one of the most complete naval captures ever made; and was a heavy stroke to the commerce of Great Britain. The Spaniards on this occasion behaved to their prisoners with great attention and humanity; and appeared disposed to make an adequate return for the generous treatment which their countrymen had experienced from Admiral Rodney. This loss, however, great as it was, was scarcely sufficient to compensate the capture of Fort Omoa from the Spaniards, where upwards of three millions of dollars were gained by the victors, and, among other valuable commodities, 25 quintals of quicksilver, without which the Spaniards could not extract the precious metals from their ores; the loss of which consequently rendered their mines useless.

But while the British were making the most vigorous efforts, and even in the main getting the better of the powers who opposed them fairly in the field, enemies were raised up throughout all Europe, who, by reason of their acting indirectly, could neither be opposed nor resisted. The power which most openly manifested its hostile intentions was Holland; but beyond this, a most formidable confederacy, under the neutrality title of the armed neutrality, was formed, evidently with a design to crush the power of Great Britain. Of this confederacy the empress of Russia declared herself the head; and her plan was intimated on the 26th of February 1780, in a declaration addressed to the courts of London, Versailles, and Madrid. In this piece it was observed, that though from the conduct of her imperial majesty it might have been hoped that her subjects would have been allowed peaceably to enjoy the fruits of their industry, and of the advantages belonging to all neutral nations, experience had proved the contrary: her imperial majesty's subjects had been often molested in their navigation, and retarded in their operations, by the ships and privateers of the belligerent powers. Her imperial majesty therefore declared, that she found herself under the necessity of removing those vexations which were offered to the commerce of Russia, as well as to the liberty of commerce in general, by all the means compatible with her dignity and the welfare of her subjects; but before she came to any serious measures, she thought it just and equitable to expose to the eyes of all all Europe the principles which she had adopted for her conduct, and which were contained in the following propositions:

1. That neutral ships should enjoy a free navigation, even from port to port, and on the coasts of the belligerent powers.

2. That all effects belonging to the subjects of the belligerent powers should be looked upon as free on board such neutral ships, excepting only such goods as were stipulated contraband.

3. Her imperial majesty, for the proper understanding of this, refers to the articles 10 and 11, of her treaty of commerce with Great Britain, extending her obligations to all the other belligerent powers.

In the treaty made between Great Britain and Russia in 1734, it is said, "The subjects of either party may freely pass, repass, and trade in all countries which now are, or hereafter shall be, at enmity with the other of the said parties, places actually blocked up or besieged only excepted, provided they do not carry any warlike stores or ammunition to the enemy: as for all other effects, their ships, passengers, and goods, shall be free and unspoiled. Cannons, mortars, or other warlike utensils, in any quantity beyond what may be necessary for the ship's provision, and may properly appertain to and be judged necessary for every man of the ship's crew, or for each passenger, shall be deemed ammunition of war; and if any such be found, they may seize and confiscate the same according to law; but neither the vessels, passengers, or the rest of the goods, shall be detained for that reason, or hindered from pursuing their voyage." The same enumeration of the goods, stipulated as contraband, was given in the treaty concluded between Great Britain and Russia in 1766.

4. That in order to determine what characterizes a port blocked up, that denomination should not be granted but to such places before which there were actually a number of enemy's ships stationed near enough so as to make its entry dangerous.

5. That these principles should serve as rules in the judicial proceedings and sentences upon the legality of prizes.

Her imperial majesty declared, that she was firmly resolved to maintain these principles; and that, in order to protect the honour of her flag and the security of the commerce and navigation of her subjects, she had given an order to fit out a considerable part of her naval forces. She added, that this measure would have no influence on the strict and rigorous neutrality which she was resolved to observe, so long as she should not be provoked and forced to depart from her principles of moderation and impartiality. It was only in that extremity that her fleet would be ordered to act wherever her honour, interest, and necessity should require. This declaration was also communicated to the States-general by Prince Gallitzin, envoy extraordinary from the empress of Russia; and he invited them to make a common cause with her, so far as such an union might serve to protect commerce and navigation. Similar communications and invitations were also made to the courts of Copenhagen, of Stockholm, and of Lisbon; in order, it was said, that, by the united care of all the neutral maritime powers, the navigation of all the neutral trading nations might be established and legalized, and a system adopted founded upon justice, and which, by its real advantage, might serve for rules to future ages.

The memorial of the empress of Russia, though very unfavourable to the views of Great Britain, received a civil answer from that court; but by other powers it was received, as it might naturally be expected, with much more cordiality. In the answer of the king of France it was said, that "what her imperial majesty claimed from the belligerent powers was nothing else than the rules prescribed to the French navy; the execution whereof was maintained with an exactness known and applauded by all Europe." He expressed his approbation of the principles and views of her imperial majesty; and declared, that from the measures she had now adopted, "solid advantages would undoubtedly result, not only to her subjects, but also to all nations." The kings of Sweden and Denmark also formally acceded to the armed neutrality proposed by the empress of Russia, and declared their perfect approbation of her sentiments. The States-general did the same: but on account of that slowness of deliberation which prevails in the councils of the republic, it was not till towards the close of the year that their concurrence was notified to the court of Russia. It was resolved by the powers engaged in this armed neutrality to make a common cause of it at sea against any of the belligerent powers who should violate, with respect to neutral nations, the principles which had been laid down in the memorial of the empress of Russia.

But though the British ministry could not openly engage in war with all the other powers of Europe, the war they determined to take severe vengeance on the Dutch, whose ingratitude and perfidy now became a general subject of speculation. It has already been observed, that, ever since the commencement of hostilities with the Americans, the Dutch had shown much partiality towards them. This continued to be the case, even beyond what the natural avidity of a mercantile people could be supposed to produce: frequent memorials and remonstrances had of consequence passed between the two nations, and the breach gradually grew wider and wider, until at last matters came to an extremity, by a discovery that the town of Amsterdam was about to enter into a commercial treaty with America. This happened in the beginning of September 1780, by the capture of Mr Laurens, lately president of the American congress, and who had been empowered by that body to conclude a treaty with Holland. Mr Laurens himself was instantly committed prisoner to the Tower of London, and a spirited remonstrance was made to the states of Holland, requiring a formal disavowal of the transaction. To this, however, no other answer could be obtained, than that they would take the matter into consideration according to the usages and forms of the country; and that a reply would be given as soon as the nature of their government would admit.

Such an equivocal answer could not by any means be satisfactory; and therefore the most vigorous measures were resolved on. On the 25th of January 1781, it was announced to the house, that his majesty had been obliged to direct letters of marque and reprisal to be issued against the States-general and their subjects. For the causes and motives of his conduct in this respect, spec, he referred to a public manifesto against that republic, which he had ordered to be laid before the house. The charges against the republic, however, were briefly summed up by Lord North in his speech on the occasion. The States, he said, in open violation of treaties, had not only refused to give Great Britain that assistance which those treaties entitled her to claim when attacked by the house of Bourbon, but had also, in direct violation of the law of nations, contributed as far as they could to furnish France with warlike stores, and had also at length thought proper to countenance the magistracy of Amsterdam in the insult which they had offered to this country, by entering into a treaty with the rebellious colonies of Great Britain, as free and independent states. By the treaty of 1678, it was stipulated, that, in case Great Britain was attacked by the house of Bourbon, she had a right to take her choice of either calling upon the States-general to become parties in the war, and to attack the house of Bourbon within two months, or of requiring an aid of 6000 troops, and 20 ships of war, which the States were to furnish immediately after the claim was made. But though this country had always preserved her faith with Holland, yet that republic had refused to fulfil the terms of this treaty.

His lordship farther observed, that the States-general had suffered Paul Jones, a Scotchman and a pirate, acting without legal authority from any acknowledged government, to bring British ships into their ports, and to refit there (a). A rebel privateer had also been saluted at the Dutch island of St Eustatius, after she had been suffered to capture two British ships within cannon-shot of their forts and castles. A memorial was presented at the Hague, in June 1779, on the breaking out of the war with Spain, to claim the aid we were entitled to require by the treaty of 1678; but of this not the least notice was taken on the part of the States. Two other notices had since been delivered, each of which met with the same reception. The British ministry had done all in their power to bring the States to a true sense of their interest; and when the necessity of the case compelled them to seize on the Dutch ships carrying stores to France, they had paid the full value for the cargoes, and returned the ships; so that neither the private merchant, the private adventurer, nor the States, had suffered. France only had felt the inconvenience, by her being deprived of that assistance which she would have received from those cargoes.

With respect to an observation that had been made, that the treaty laid before the house, between the Dutch and the Americans, was nothing more than a contemplative project, his lordship remarked, that it was actually signed and sealed; the name of Van Berkel the penionary of Amsterdam, and Monf. de Neuville, a merchant and burgess of that city, being subscribed to it on the part of the magistracy of Amsterdam, and the name of John Lee, as commissioner or agent for the congress of America. The States-general had also refused to pay the least attention to the requisition in his majesty's memorial, delivered by Sir Joseph Yorke, that proper notice should be taken of Van Berkel and his associates; so far as such a refusal could be implied by a contemptuous silence. As to the principal magistrates of Amsterdam, they were so far from disavowing the fact, or attempting to palliate it, that they gloried in the whole transaction; and expressly declared, even to the States-general, that what they had done was what their indispensible duty required.

His lordship added, that he lamented the necessity of a war with Holland; but it appeared to him to be an unavoidable measure. He confessed the situation of this country to be truly alarming; but when he considered the powerful stand that had already been made against the most alarming confederacy that had ever been formed against Great Britain, the little success that the enemies of this country had met with in all their various attempts against it, and the spirit and resources of the nation, the public prospects appeared to him much less gloomy than some gentlemen thought proper to represent them. Our difficulties were certainly great; but he trusted that they were by no means insuperable. He was neither dextrous in concealing their magnitude, nor afraid to meet them, great as they must be acknowledged; because he was convinced, that when the force of this country was fully exerted, it was equal to the contest; and that the only means of obtaining an honourable and just peace, was to show ourselves capable of carrying on the war with spirit and vigour.

Before this national resolution, however, could possibly have been communicated officially to the naval commanders in the West Indies, the Dutch were actually

(a) This man, who had been formerly a servant in Lord Selkirk's house, had landed in 1778 and plundered it of the plate, but without doing any farther mischief. The action, however, was very disagreeable to his own party; and at the desire of Dr Franklin, the plate was afterwards restored. After this exploit, he attempted to set fire to the town of Whitehaven, but without success. In 1779, he made a descent on the coast of Ireland, but without committing any act of hostility. His people indeed carried off some sheep and oxen, but their captain paid liberally for what they had taken. In the month of September 1779 he appeared in the frith of Forth with several prizes. They advanced up the frith above the island of Inchkeith, so as to be nearly opposite to Leith. His design was supposed to have been to burn the shipping there; but he was prevented from attempting this by a strong west wind; and such measures were also taken for the defence of the harbour, by erecting batteries and otherwise, that he would probably have miscarried had any attempt been made. On leaving the coast of Scotland, he fell in with the Serapis and Scarborough, both of which he took after a most desperate engagement; by which all the vessels were reduced almost to wrecks. These were carried into a Dutch harbour; and it was this transaction to which Lord North now alluded. He was called a pirate, on account of his not being at that time properly furnished with a commission either from France or America, though this was denied by the opposite party. ally attacked. The defenceless island of St Eustatius was, on the 3rd of February 1781, summoned by Admiral Rodney and General Vaughan to surrender to the arms of Great Britain, and only one hour given to consider of it. The immense property on the island was confiscated, and a fate inflicted, with such circumstances of apparent capacity, as not only became the subject of a discussion in parliament, but drew upon this nation, whether justly or not we pretend not to determine, the ill will of all Europe.

The Dutch nation seem not in the present case to have behaved with any degree of prudence. Notwithstanding their provoking conduct towards Britain, they had made no preparations for war in case of being attacked. Notwithstanding this inactivity, however, it still appeared that they retained their ancient valor, and were in fact the most formidable naval enemies Britain had to contend with. By the month of August 1781 they had equipped a considerable squadron, the command of which was given to Rear-admiral Zoutman. On the 5th of that month, this squadron fell in with the British fleet commanded by Admiral Hyde Parker. The force commanded by the Dutch admiral consisted, according to their own account, of one of 74 guns, one of 64, three of 54, and one of 44, besides frigates; but the English account represents the Dutch fleet as consisting of eight two-decked ships. No gun was fired on either side till they were within the distance of half musket-shot. The action began about eight in the morning, and continued with an unceasing fire for three hours and forty minutes. Both sides fought with equal ardour, and little advantage was gained on either. When the heat of the action was over, both squadrons lay to a considerable time near each other, when the Dutch ships of war with their convoy bore away for the Texel; and the English ships were all too much disabled to follow them. A Dutch 74 gun ship sunk soon after the action. On board the British fleet 104 were killed and 339 wounded; and the loss of the Dutch was probably greater. Admiral Zoutman, in the account of the engagement transmitted by him to the lord-lieutenant, said, that his men "fought like lions;" and it was said by the British admiral, in the account sent by him to the admiralty, that "his majesty's officers and men behaved with great bravery, nor did the enemy show less gallantry." The admiral of the Dutch fleet was promoted, honorary rewards were given to the principal officers, and two months pay to the men, for their behaviour in the action. When Admiral Parker's fleet arrived at the Nore, his majesty, in order to testify his sense of his merit, went on board his ship, with the avowed design, as it is said, of conferring on him the honour of knighthood: but this the admiral thought proper to decline; and it was generally supposed, that this veteran officer was much disgusted, that more ships had not been sent to him, for which he had applied, and which he conceived might have been spared, so that he might have been enabled to obtain a complete victory.

Thus the war was still carried on in various parts of the globe in such a manner as seemed to evince the impossibility of crushing the power of Great Britain by any force whatever. In Europe, the utmost efforts of France and Spain were able to produce nothing more than the annual parade of a mighty fleet in the Channel. This was answered by the appearance of a British fleet so formidable that the allies never durst attack them. The states of Holland had drawn out their force; and this too was opposed by one, which, if insufficient to conquer, was at least able to prevent their effecting anything detrimental to our possessions. In the East Indies the united powers of the French and Indians had been conquered, and the Dutch settlements had suffered severely. In the year 1781, however, the British naval power in the West Indies seemed to fain, and some events took place which threatened a total ruin of the empire in these parts. This was owing to the vast superiority of the combined fleets of France and Spain, by whom that of Britain was now far outnumbered, that they could not achieve anything of consequence. An ineffectual attempt on the island of St Vincent's was made by Admiral Rodney; and an indecisive engagement took place, April 28th, between Admiral Hood and the count de Graille; the event of which, however, if not advantageous, was certainly honourable to Britain, as the French had a superiority of six ships of the line. The damage done Tobago to the British ships having obliged them to retire to Barbadoes to refit, the French took that opportunity to make a descent on the island of Tobago. The governor, Mr Ferguson, made a gallant resistance; but was at last obliged to surrender, as no prospect of succours appeared. On his return to England he complained loudly that the island had been unnecessarily lost. Admiral Rodney had sent Rear-admiral Drake with six sail of the line, three frigates, and some troops, to the assistance of the island; but they were sent too late, and the island had capitulated before any relief was afforded it. In a letter of Admiral Rodney, which was published in the gazette, some surprise was expressed, that the place had surrendered so soon: upon which Governor Ferguson published an account of the siege, signed with his name, in all the London papers, in which he recriminated on the admiral. The governor's narrative was so peripetuous, so apparently satisfactory, and his charge against the admiral so strong, that it was thought incumbent on the latter to vindicate his conduct: but no answer to the governor's accusation ever appeared.

Besides the inconveniences which the British West India islands suffered in consequence of the war, it was also a misfortune to some of them that they were involved in domestic disputes, occasioned by their dissatisfaction at the conduct of their governors. This was particularly the case with Jamaica and Barbadoes, in both which islands there were frequent contests about this time between the houses of assembly and the governors. But the remonstrances of the inhabitants on the subject did not meet with much attention from those who had it in their power to afford them relief: for it seemed, indeed, to be a kind of maxim with the British administration at this period, to pay little regard to any complaints from the subjects of the empire, respecting any abuse of authority, from whatever quarter they might come, Ireland only excepted; and, with respect to that kingdom, they were induced to relax a little from the high tone they were accustomed to assume, by the powerful and energetic arguments of the Irish volunteers. The great and decisive stroke, however, which happened this year, was the capture of Lord Cornwallis with the division of the army under his command. Other events, indeed, were sufficiently mortifying. The province of West Florida had been reduced by the Spaniards; Minorca was besieged by them with an apparent impossibility of holding out; the island of St Eustatius was surprized by the French; and in short every circumstance seemed to proclaim the necessity of putting an end to a war so calamitous and destructive.

All the disasters that had yet happened, however, were not sufficient to induce the ministry to abandon their favourite scheme of war with the colonies. The parliament met on the 27th of November 1781. It has already been observed, that in the year 1780 the ministry had received such a signal defeat as seemed to prognosticate the ruin of their power. They had indeed afterwards acquired a majority, and the extreme terror produced by the riots had contributed not a little to the establishment of their authority. The remembrance of what had passed, however, most probably induced them to a dissolution of parliament; while the successes at Charlestown and other parts of America, once more gave them a decided majority in both houses. But the disasters of the year 1781 involved them in the utmost difficulty and distresses. In the speech from the throne, his majesty observed, that the war was still unhappily prolonged by that restless ambition which first excited the enemies of his crown and people to commence it, and which still continued to disappoint his earnest desire and diligent exertions to restore the public tranquillity. But he should not answer the trust committed to the sovereign of a free people, nor make a suitable return to his subjects for their zealous and affectionate attachment to him, if he consented to sacrifice, either to his own desire of peace, or to their temporary ease and relief, those essential rights and permanent interests, upon the maintenance and preservation of which the future strength and security of Great Britain must depend. The events of war, he said, had been very unfortunate to his arms in Virginia, having ended in the loss of his forces in that province. No endeavours, he added, had been wanting on his part to extinguish that spirit of rebellion which his enemies had found means to foment and maintain in the colonies, and to restore to his deluded subjects in America that happy and prosperous condition which they had formerly derived from a due obedience to the laws; but the late misfortune in that quarter called loudly for the firm concurrence and assistance of parliament, in order to frustrate the designs of their enemies, which were equally prejudicial to the real interests of America and to those of Great Britain. At the close of the speech, his majesty observed, that among the many ill consequences which attended the continuation of the present war, he sincerely regretted the additional burdens which it must unavoidably bring upon his faithful subjects; but he still declared his perfect conviction of the justice of his cause; and that he had no doubt, but that, by the concurrence and support of his parliament, by the valour of his fleets and armies, and by a vigorous, animated, and united exertion of the faculties and resources of his people, he should be enabled to restore the blessings of a safe and honourable peace to all his dominions.

A motion for an address of thanks, couched in the usual style, was made in the house of commons. It was urged, that a durable and advantageous peace could result only from the firm, vigorous, and unremitting prosecution of the war. The present was not the time to relinquish hope, but to resolve upon exertion. By despair we should invite calamity to overwhelm us; and it would ill become a great and valiant people, whose resources were yet powerful and numerous, to submit where they should resist; to look with indifference upon their political importance; and to tarnish, by indolent pusillanimity, the national and dear-bought glories both of remote and recent eras, instead of opposing, with augmented force, a combination whose inveterate efforts to throw out of the scale of Europe the whole political existence of Great Britain, were strengthened by the late victory over Lord Cornwallis in Virginia. But if a general spirit of unanimity, so requisite at one of the most alarming and important periods in the British annals, were to arise within the walls of parliament, and thence to diffuse itself throughout the body of the people, the gloom that hovered round us would rapidly disperse, and great successes would conduct the nation back to all its pristine splendour and felicity.

This was vehemently opposed by Mr Fox and Mr Burke. The latter remarked, that if there could be a greater misfortune than had already been undergone by this kingdom in the present disgraceful contest, it was hearing men rise up in the great assembly of the nation to vindicate such measures. If the ministry and the parliament were not to be taught by experience; if neither calamities could make them feel, nor the voice of God make them wise; what had this fallen and undone country to hope for? If anything could tend to deject the people of England, to make them despair of their situation, and resign themselves to their fate, it must be to receive information that their ministers, after all that had been suffered, were yet determined to go on with the American war. A battle might be lost, an enterprise might miscarry, an island might be captured, an army might be lost in the best of causes, and even under a system of vigour and foresight; because the battle, after all the wisdom and bravery of man, was in the hands of heaven; and if either or all these calamities had happened in a good cause, and under the auspices of a vigilant administration, a brave people would not despair. But it was not so in the present case. Amidst all their sufferings and their misfortunes, they saw nothing so distressing as the weakness or wickedness of their ministers. They seemed still determined to go on, without plan, and without foresight, in this war of calamities; for everything that happened in it was a calamity. He considered them all alike, victories and defeats; towns taken, and towns evacuated; new generals appointed, and old generals recalled; they were all alike calamities in his eyes, for they all spurred us on to this fatal business. Victories gave us hopes, defeats made us desperate, and both instigated us to go on. They were, therefore, both calamities; and the king's speech was the greatest calamity of all; for the king's speech flowed... Britain showed us the disposition of the ministers; and this disposition was not to retreat an inch; to go on, to plunge us deeper, to make our situation more disgraceful and more unhappy.

In the course of the debate, it was contended on the part of administration, and particularly by Lord North, that by the address, as originally proposed, the house did not pledge themselves to any continuance of the American war; but this was strongly denied by the gentlemen in opposition. However, the point was at last decided in favour of ministry by a majority of 216 to 129; and the address was then carried as originally proposed.

In the house of peers, a motion for an address similar to that of the house of commons, was made by Lord Southampton, and seconded by Lord Walsingham. It was vigorously opposed by the earl of Shelburne; who observed, that seven years had now elapsed since blood was first drawn in America; and from that period to the present the affairs of Great Britain had been continually growing worse. A long progress in the war had left us in a situation in which there were no advantages to console; but dangers and calamities had arisen, which were unknown to us at the commencement of hostilities. Of nearly 87,000 men sent to America, how few had returned! What treasures had been in vain expended! What enormous debts accumulated! The most liberal national supplies had been followed by nothing but calamities; and the whole proceedings of the ministry manifested a want of system and of intelligence. Among other instances of mismanagement, his lordship remarked, that instead of blocking up the French fleets within their own harbours, or immediately intercepting them on their putting out to sea, we had suffered them to fail far upon their expeditions to our distant settlements; and when they had acquired this great advantage, we slowly followed their powerful armaments with inconsiderable squadrons, and scarcely ever reached the place of destination till the enterprises of the enemy were totally accomplished. His lordship also declared it to be his opinion, that the capture of Earl Cornwallis was owing to the preceding capture of St Eustatius. As to the farther prosecution of the war with the least prospect of success, it was totally impossible: the nation was too much exhausted both of men and money; recruits were not to be procured for the army; and as to our navy, if we had the best first lord of the admiralty, and the ablest board that ever sat, it was impossible to provide for all the distant services of so extensive a war. The reason was obvious. The fine navy that belonged to Great Britain at the conclusion of the last war had been suffered to rot and moulder away; while France and Spain had recruited and repaired their marine during the whole period of the peace.

Among other strictures on ministerial conduct, it was observed by the duke of Richmond, that at present scarcely a seventh part of the people were represented, while all the remainder had no concern whatever, either virtually or individually, in the management of their own affairs; which their lordships well knew, the constitution of this country, as originally framed, gave them a right to have. He appealed to the house, whether many of their lordships did not name the members for several boroughs, and whether the representatives were not chosen only by the management of two or three burgesses. Were this point reformed, his grace declared, that he should still expect to see the country capable of regaining some portion of its former greatness. He also made some observations on the interior cabinet, which had, he said, been the ruin of this country. To prove its mischievous tendency, he intimated the declaration of the late earl of Chatham, who confessed to the house, "that he was duped and deceived, and that he had not been ten days in the cabinet before he felt the ground rotten under his feet." His grace likewise said, that though it was the middle of war, he made no scruple to recommend it most strenuously to government, immediately to set about curtailing the numbers of the army, and that as much as possible. He recommended, that arms should be put into the hands of the people, for the purposes of domestic defence; and he did not doubt but that in this case, they would act with greater power and success, than even the most numerous military forces. He also advised withdrawing the troops from America, augmenting the navy as much as possible, and sending such succours to the West India islands as might enable them effectually to resist any attempts from the enemy.

Lord Stormont defended the address as originally proposed; and observed, that the language of the speech from the throne was proper to be held by any prince worthy of the crown, in a moment like the present; and the long established custom rendered such an address as had been moved the fit answer to it. The preservation of America, as a dependent part of the British empire, was too important to be relinquished; and the present crisis, so far from justifying despair, called for a redoubled ardour, and for immediate exertion.

The lord-chancellor said, that the present speech from the throne, like all others at the commencement of a session, was no more than a brief state of the nation, delivered in the ancient style of composition, and conformably to established usage, from almost the first existence of parliament; and as to the address, its language not being specifically binding, their lordships might vote in favour of it, without pledging themselves to support any future ministerial measure whatever. The house at length divided, when Lord Shelburne's amendment was rejected by a majority of 75 to 31. A short protest against the address was entered by the duke of Richmond, the marquis of Rockingham, and Earl Fitzwilliam; in which they declared, that they dissented "for reasons too often urged in vain for the last seven years, against the ruinous prosecution of the unjust war carrying on by his majesty's ministers against the people of North America; and too fatally confirmed by repeated experience, and the late disgraceful loss of a second army, to stand in need of repetition."

Though ministers thus succeeded in carrying the addresses in the usual form, they did not meet with the like success in their main plan of carrying on the war. After the debate on the number of seamen, which was fixed to 100,000 for the ensuing year, Sir James Lowther moved as a resolution of the house, "That the war carried on with America had been ineffectual for Lowther." the purposes for which it was undertaken; and that all farther attempts to reduce that continent by force of arms would be in vain, and must be injurious to this country, by weakening her powers to resist her ancient and confederated enemies." This was supported by a number of arguments interlarded with the most severe reflections on ministerial conduct. In the course of this debate it was observed, and indeed with evident truth, that every state of consequence in Europe withheld its succours, and left us to contend alone against a multitude of enemies; so that we should search in vain for an ally from one corner of the universe to the other. As to the American war, in which the ministry so madly persisted, it was not like a war between two rival and two neighbouring states, about a barrier or a boundary; a contest which, however it ended, could not detract much from the importance or weight of either. It was a war in which the conclusion of every campaign was against us; in which we weakened no enemy by our efforts; in which we had suffered everything, without gaining anything. The American war had been a war of delusion from the beginning to the end. Every promise had been broken, every assurance had been falsified, every object had been completely given up. The ministry had said one thing one day; and the next day they had come down again, and with grave faces said what was directly contrary. But it was time to put an end to these delusions; not the least prospect of success in the war now remained; the period was therefore come, when it was indispensably necessary that the parliament should interfere, in order to avert that ruin with which this unhappy country was so immediately threatened.

The motion was opposed by Lord North; who said, that if it was agreed to by the house, it must put an end to the American war in every shape, and even cripple the hands of government in other respects. It would point out to the enemies of this country what were to be the mode and operations of the war; and thus inform the enemy in what manner they might best point their operations against this country during the next campaign. Great Britain must not retain any post in the colonies; for that would be considered as one mode of attempting to reduce the Americans to obedience by force. But was it not manifest, that there might be a necessity of retaining certain posts in America, for the convenience even of carrying on the war against France and Spain?

With respect to the American war in general, his lordship acknowledged, that it had been extremely unfortunate; but he affirmed, that the misfortunes and calamities which had attended it, though of a most serious and fatal nature, were matters rather to be deplored and lamented as the events of war, in themselves perpetually uncertain, than to be ascribed to any criminality in ministers. He had always considered the American war as a war of the most cruel necessity; but at the same time as a war commenced for the support of the just rights of the crown and of the parliament of Great Britain. He would also venture to declare, that as the war was unfortunate to all his fellow-subjects, so it was particularly distressing to himself. He had always considered it as the heaviest calamity of his life: and if, at any time, a sacrifice, not only of the emoluments of his situation, but even of the whole of his private fortune, could have purchased for his country a safe and honourable peace, he would have made that sacrifice with the utmost cheerfulness, and thought the opportunity of offering it the greatest blessing which could possibly have befallen him. His lordship added, that though he totally disapproved of the motion, yet he was willing to declare it to be his opinion, that it would not be wise nor right to go on with the American war as we had hitherto done; that is, to send armies to traverse from the south to the north of the provinces in their interior parts, as had been done in a late case, and which had failed of producing the intended and the desired effect.

This new method of carrying on the war was as opposed by much disapproving of as the other; nor indeed did it seem to be generally believed that any material alteration was to take place in the ministerial system. General Burgoyne observed, that declaring a design of maintaining posts in America, of the nature of New York, was declaring a design of offensive war; and that such a maintenance of posts would prove an imprudent and a preposterous war. The great if not the only purpose of keeping places of arms upon an enemy's coast, and especially upon a continent, must be for offensive war. During the glorious administration of the earl of Chatham, a place of arms was intended to be established at St Malo's; and it was afterwards established at Belleisle upon a more extensive view than that of a mere inlet into the country. It made a powerful diversion, and drew a great military force from Germany, to protect the whole range of coast from Bayonne to Dunkirk, which was threatened by an embarkation from that place of arms. But the circumstance which rendered that menace against the French coast either practicable or formidable was, our dominion of the sea. At that splendid era, our naval flag rode in the very bays of France as securely as if anchored at Spithead; and a few frigates would have convoyed an army of 20,000 men to any one point of the French or Spanish coast. This then could be produced as a just precedent for a place of arms. But what other precedents existed? The command of a strait, by which it was possible either to give an inlet for commerce, or to divide the ports of an enemy. Of such a nature was Calais, which, together with Dover, kept separate as often as we thought proper the great ocean and the German sea. Such also was Gibraltar; a place of arms that gave a virtual superiority to the navy of England, though with an inferior number of ships, as separating the ports of the house of Bourbon in the ocean from their ports in the Mediterranean, and preventing the junction of their fleets. But New York, as a place of arms, could answer no possible purpose but to feed an impracticable war, and to multiply that system of contracts, loans, and influence, which, after having operated to the loss of every dependence of the country, was ready to give the final blow to the last remains of property and liberty in the country itself.

The general added, that he had not hitherto touched the recants upon the principle of the American war. The impracticability of it was a sufficient justification for supporting the present motion. But he was now convinced that the principle of the American war was wrong, though he had not been of that opinion when he... he formerly engaged in the service in America. He had been brought to this conviction by observing the uniform conduct and behaviour of the people of America. Passion, prejudice, and interest, might operate suddenly and partially; but when we saw one principle pervading the whole continent, the Americans resolutely encountering difficulty and death for a course of years, it must be a strong vanity and presumption in our own minds, which could only lead us to imagine that they were not in the right. It was reason, and the finger of God alone, that implanted the same sentiment in three millions of people. He would affect the truth of the fact against all which either art or contrivance could produce to the contrary. He was likewise now convinced, upon comparing the conduct of the ministry, as time had developed their system, that the American war formed only a part of a general design levelled against the constitution of this country and the general rights of mankind.

After some farther debate, Sir James Lowther's motion was rejected by a majority of 220 to 179. This, however, was a majority in which the ministry had little reason to exult; as it was sufficiently apparent, from the numbers who voted against administration, that the uninfluenced sense of that house was clearly and decisively against any farther prosecution of the American war.

Other arguments to the same purpose with those of General Burgoyne, just mentioned, were used in the debate on the army estimates. On the 14th of December, the secretary at war informed the house, that the whole force of the army, including the militia of this kingdom, required for the service of the year 1782, would amount to 186,220 men, and for this force the parliament had to provide. The sum required for these troops for pay, clothing, and other articles, amounted to four millions two hundred and twenty thousand pounds. This military force exceeded that of the last year by 4074 men; and the expense was consequently greater by 29,667l. 15s. The increase was occasioned by the greater number of troops already sent, or then going, to the East Indies. But the expense of those troops was to be reimbursed by the East India Company.

After some farther statements relative to the military force of the kingdom, and its expense, had been made by the secretary at war, Colonel Barré rose, and with great vehemence declared, that the estimates of the army which were laid before that house were scandalous and evasive. There was a much greater number of non-effective men than were stated in the estimates. In fact, they amounted to a fifth part of the army. The house should also recollect, that the estimates lying on the table did not compose the whole of the expenses of the army; for extraordinary sums of several millions were yet to come. Neither were the men under the several descriptions given by the secretary at war the whole number of military force employed. Other troops were employed solely at the discretion of the minister, and paid irregularly and unconstitutionally, without the assent or knowledge of the legislature; particularly the provincial corps in America, amounting to nine thousand men in actual service, the statement of which force, though it had been called for from year to year, was never brought into the estimates.

With respect to the army estimates, the colonel proceeded to observe, that in many instances they were filled with such abandoned impositions, that there appeared an actual design to treat inquiries from the parliament with sovereign contempt. Several regiments, of which the number of men did not amount to one hundred, were set down at eight hundred; and others not having more than fifty were mentioned in the estimates as consisting of five, six, or seven hundred men. Indeed, too large a part of the armies, for which that house had been persuaded to give their votes, existed only upon paper. Amongst other regiments, the royal English fusiliers had not even a fourth of their complement. The royal Scotch fusiliers were in a worse predicament. Their number fell short of even one hundred men. The 60th regiment was stated as amounting to 3500 men, when the fact was, that it did not consist of 1500; and many others might be enumerated in the same situation. The statement of the estimates relative to garrisons, particularly those of Gibraltar and Minorca, were equally delusive and overcharged.

Lord George Germaine said, that the reason why the provincial corps had not been included in the estimates was, that some share of the public money might be spared, by avoiding to vote an establishment for these troops. They were raised and paid in a manner by much the most economical for the nation. They were solely under the management of the commander in chief; and an officer, called the inspector-general of the provincial corps, regularly took care to muster them from time to time; nor was a single man paid for if not in actual employ. His lordship also informed the house, that the ministry were unanimously of opinion, that, considering the present situation of affairs, and the misfortunes of the war, it would not be right to continue any longer the plan on which it had hitherto been conducted; and therefore that a fresh army would not be sent to supply the place of that captured at York-town under Earl Cornwallis.

Sir George Savile expressed the strongest disapprobation of any farther prosecution of the American war, or of raising any more troops for that purpose. He adverted to the intimation which had been given by the ministry, that a change was to be made in the mode of conducting the American war. This, he said, was in fact telling the house that they were determined to prosecute the war with all the feeble efforts of which they were yet capable. Every unprejudiced and sensible observer must perceive, that so extraordinary a conduct resembled, if it did not indicate, the violence of insanity. General Conway declared, that he entirely disapproved of a continuance of the American war in any form, as he wished that it might totally cease. He eagerly desired the recall of our fleets and armies, and was anxious for an entire and immediate prevention of those calamities which had almost completed the destruction of the empire. He considered an avowal of the independence of America as a severe misfortune, and a debasing stroke against Great Britain; but of the two evils he would choose the least, and he would submit to the independency of America. In short, he would almost yield to any circumstance whatsoever, rather than persist a day longer in the prosecution of so pernicious a war. Ideas had been started relative to a war of ports, among which New York had been particularly mentioned. But on what military authority did the ministry presume to think that New York was tenable? What garrison would be able to maintain it? The diversity of military opinions given on this subject served rather to alarm than to convince. To secure New York, the possession of Long island, which is a hundred miles in length, is absolutely necessary; and it was well known that Sir Henry Clinton, with all his troops, did not consider himself as secure. Notwithstanding these and other arguments, however, the question was carried in favour of ministry by a considerable majority, and the supplies were voted accordingly.

Besides the grand question for and against the continuance of the American war, several other matters of smaller moment were agitated this session; particularly the affair of St Eustatius * as already mentioned, an inquiry into the state of the navy, and into the causes of our bad success in the American war. All these questions were carried in favour of ministry, though not without a strength of opposition they had never experienced before. A motion for censuring Lord Sandwich was lost only by 236 to 217; and so general did the desire of a change of administration now appear, that it excited no small degree of surprise that the present ministers should still retain their places. Nothing could fit in a more striking point of view the detestation in which they were held, than the extreme aversion shown at admitting Lord George Germaine to the dignity of peerage. On this occasion, the Minden business was not only ripped up, but after his actual investiture, and when he had taken his seat in the house, under the title of Lord Viscount Sackville, a second debate ensued relative to the dishonour the peers had sustained by his admission into their house. It was moved by the marquis of Caernarvon, that "it was reprehensible in any minister, and highly derogatory to the honour of that house, to advise the crown to exercise its indisputable right of creating a peer, in favour of a person labouring under the heavy censure of a court martial," which was particularly stated in the motion, and also the public orders given out on the occasion by the late king. The marquis urged, that the house of peers being a court of honour, it behoved them most carefully to preserve that honour uncontaminated, and to endeavour to mark out, as forcibly as possible, the disfavour which they felt at receiving into their assembly, as a brother peer, a person stigmatized in the orderly books of every regiment in the service. The earl of Abingdon observed, that he could not help conceiving, that although there was not a right of election, there was and must be a right of exclusion, vested in that house, when the admission of any peer happened to be against the sense of their lordships. His judgment of this arose not only from the idea, that that house was possessed of original rights, as independent of the crown as of the people; but from the circumstance of their being the hereditary counsellors of the crown, against the sense of whom, he held, the crown could not of right exert itself. His lordship declared, that he considered the admission of Lord George Germaine to a peerage, to be no less an insufferable indignity to that house, than an outrageous insult to the people at large. It was an indignity to that house, because it was connecting them with one whom every solder was forbidden to associate with. It was an insult to the people; for what had the person raised to the peerage done to merit honours superior to his fellow-citizens? He had only one claim to any kind of promotion; and that was, that he had undone his country, by executing the plan of that accursed, invisible, though efficient cabinet, from whom, as he had received his orders, so he had obtained his reward.

Lord Sackville declared, that he neither knew by whose advice he had been raised to this dignity, nor thought, that, in a point of this nature, the recommendation of any minister was in the least needful. To bestow honours was the peculiar and universally admitted prerogative of the crown, provided that the parties advanced to them were competent to receive them. This he insisted was the case at present. The sentence of the court-martial was stated as the ground of the objection against his elevation to the peerage; but even such a sentence did not amount to any legal disfavour whatsoever. Twenty-three years had elapsed since the court-martial which sat upon him had pronounced that sentence; and he should naturally suppose, that such of their lordships, and of the public in general, as were at all acquainted with the peculiarly hard and unfair circumstances which accompanied his trial, had been long accustomed to behold this business in its proper point of view. Afflicted by an excess of acrimony, at least equal to any that a British officer could have experienced from enemies at once implacable and unjust, he was condemned, unheard, and punished previously to his trial. In these circumstances, it was well known, that he had challenged his accusers to come forward; that he had provoked inquiry; and had insisted upon a trial. He was assured at the time, that if the determination of the court-martial should even prove capital, it would be carried into execution; but no intimations of this kind could dissuade him from insisting that a trial should take place; and he flattered himself, that the candour and equity of their lordships would lead them to conclude, that such behaviour, under such circumstances, could only result from a consciousness of innocence. To the sentence of it he had submitted; and, as the result of such submission, he thought that he had then acquitted himself to his country and to the public. At the present moment, it was extremely singular, that although neither the charge, nor the defence, nor the evidence, nor in short any one part of the proceedings on the trial, was before their lordships, they were called upon to put the sentence a second time in force against him. He trusted, however, that their lordships would call to mind the occurrences which had taken place with respect to himself, subsequent to that period. In 1765, not more than four years after the trial, he was appointed to an office in administration. Previously to his acceptance of the proposition then made to him that he should bear a part in administration, it was agreed for him to become a member of the council-board. There he accordingly took his seat; and thenceforward considered such a circumstance as virtually a repeal of the sentence of the court-martial. A revision of the proceedings of the court-martial was now unattainable; for during the space of Britain. 23 years, the period of time which had elapsed since the trial, every member who had sat upon it except one had been dead and buried. An attempt to investigate the motives which actuated the several members of the court was equally impracticable. He hoped, therefore, their lordships would be of opinion, that he was fully competent to receive the title which his sovereign had been graciously pleased to bestow upon him; and that it was neither expedient, necessary, nor becoming, for that house, to fly in the face of the crown, or to oppose its indisputable prerogative, because it had advanced an old and faithful servant to the dignity of a seat among their lordships.

The duke of Richmond observed, that from the reign of Edward III. to the time of Henry VII. it was expressly stated, in every new patent of the creation of a peer, that such creation was made with the consent of parliament; nor did a single instance occur, during the whole of this period, of any title being granted without the particular acquiescence of the house of lords. After the reign of Henry VII. the crown carried with a considerably less restraining hand this exercise of the prerogative; and during the later eras, it had been generally regarded as an uncontrollable and established right. It appeared, however, that the ancient principles of the British constitution had set boundaries to restrain this exercise of the prerogative; and that formerly a legal disaffiliation was not the only circumstance which might amount to a disqualification for the peerage. Some insinuations had been thrown out respecting the decision of the court-martial, which were far from being well-grounded. When the court-martial took place, for the purpose of determining the criminality or the innocence of the noble viscount, the times were not, as had been represented, remarkable for the predominance of clamour or of faction. He observed, that their lordships were not ignorant, that the noble viscount reflected a considerable part of the vindication of his behaviour at the battle of Minden, upon the supposed existence of a striking variation in the orders delivered from Prince Ferdinand to the commander of the cavalry. It was understood that the first order was, that the cavalry should advance; and the second, that the British cavalry should advance. Yet even under these supposed contradictory orders, it was evident that the noble lord should advance; and, certainly, the distance being short, he enjoyed a sufficient space of time for obedience to his instructions. Lord Southampton, who delivered one of the messages, was now present in the house; and it should seem, that he had no choice, on this occasion, but to acknowledge, either that he did not properly deliver such orders to the noble viscount, or that the latter, having properly received them, neglected to obey them. But whatever difficulties might have arisen, during the endeavours to determine exactly how much time had actually been lost, in consequence of the non-compliance of the noble viscount with the orders which he received, his grace said, that he could with much facility have solved what all the witnesses examined as to this point were not able positively to determine. If, as he was summoned to appear upon the trial, his deposition had been called for, he could have proved, because he held all the while his watch within his hand, and seldom ceased to look at it, that the time lost when the noble viscount delayed to advance, under pretence, that, receiving such contradictory orders, it was impossible for him to discover whether he ought to advance with the whole cavalry, or only with the British cavalry, was one hour and a half. It was, therefore, extremely evident, that the noble lord had it in his power to have brought up the cavalry from the distance of a mile and a quarter; in consequence of which, by joining in the battle, they might have rendered the victory more brilliant and decisive. But, before the arrival of this cavalry, the engagement was concluded. Such was the testimony, his grace said, which, having had the honour to serve at the battle of Minden, under Prince Ferdinand of Brunswick, he must have borne, it being summoned, the members of the court-martial had thought proper to have examined him on the trial. Under such circumstances, the noble viscount could have little reason to complain of the sentence of the court-martial, of the orders which followed, or of the loss of his commission.

The motion was powerfully supported by other arguments, both by the duke of Richmond himself and other peers; but, however, was rejected by a majority of 93 against 28. A protest was entered, signed by nine peers, in which the sentence and the public sentiment were particularly stated; and in which they declared, that they "could not look upon the raising to the peerage a person so circumstanced, in any other light than as a measure fatal to the interests as well as to the glory of the crown, and to the dignity of that house; insulting to the memory of the late sovereign, and likewise to every surviving branch of the illustrious house of Brunswick; repugnant to every principle of military discipline, and directly contrary to the maintenance of the honour of that house, and to that honour which has for ages been the glorious characteristic of the British nation, and which, as far as could depend on them, they found themselves called upon, not more by duty than inclination, to transmit pure and unfulfilled to posterity."

The ruinous tendency of the American war was now so strikingly apparent, that it became necessary an address for those who had a just sense of the dangerous situation of their country, who wished well to its interests, or even to prevent its destruction, to exert their most vigorous efforts to put an end to so fatal a contest. Accordingly, on the 22d of February, a motion was made by General Conway, "That an humble address should be presented, earnestly imploring his majesty, that, taking into his royal consideration the many and great calamities which had attended the present unfortunate war, and the heavy burdens thereby brought on his loyal and affectionate people, he would be graciously pleased to listen to the humble prayer and advice of his faithful commons, that the war on the continent of North America might no longer be pursued for the impracticable purpose of reducing that country to obedience by force; and expressing their hope that the earnest desire and diligent exertion to restore the public tranquillity, of which they had received his majesty's most gracious assurances, might, by a happy reconciliation with the revolted colonies, be forwarded and made effectual; to which great end, his majesty's faithful commons would be ready most cheerfully to give In the speech by which he introduced this motion, the general set forth the enormities with which the British arms had to frequently been stigmatized by opposition, and the excessive animosity of the Americans. Not a single friend to the British government (he said) could be discovered amongst the inhabitants of North America from one end of the country to the other. We had, indeed, at present no object to contend for: for if it could be admitted for a moment, even for the sake of argument, that it were possible we might conquer at the last, what benefits would repay the struggle for the victory? We should then only gain a desert, a country depopulated by the war, which our despotism and barbarity, our avarice and ambition, our antipathy for freedom, and our passion for injustice, had kindled in her bosom. But all expectations of this kind were in the highest degree vain and absurd; though he had received intelligence (the general said) from a person lately arrived from America, in whose veracity, experience, and discernment, he could implicitly confide, that the people of that country, although in arms against us, were still anxious for the accomplishment of peace. He was also assured, that certain individuals, at no considerable distance, were empowered on the part of the congress to treat with the ministers of Great Britain for the attainment of so essential an object. These circumstance were not unknown to government; and a noble lord, who had lately retired from the office of a secretary of state for the American department, had been particularly applied to on this interesting occasion. What reason could the ministers assign why they had neglected to improve this singular advantage, and seemed to spurn at all ideas of negotiation? Could it be possible, that a series of ignominious miscarriages and defeats had not yet operated as a cure for the inhuman and destructive love of war? Such was the situation of the nation, that it behoved the ministers to negotiate for peace almost on any terms. But as they had hitherto done nothing of this kind, it was indispensably necessary that the parliament should interfere, and put an immediate end to a war so calamitous, so fatal, and so destructive. The motion was seconded by Lord John Cavendish, who remarked, that the American war had been a war of malice and resentment, without either dignity in its conduct, probability in its object, or justice in its origin. It was, however, vigorously opposed by administration, who had still sufficient strength to gain their point, though only by a single vote, the motion being rejected by 194 to 193.

The increasing strength of opposition now showed that the downfall of ministry was at hand. The decision of the last question was considered as a victory gained by the former, and Mr Fox instantly gave notice that the subject would be resumed in a few days, under another form. It was accordingly revived on the 27th of February; on which day a petition from the city of London was presented to the house, soliciting the house to interpose in such a manner as should prevent any farther prosecution of the American war; after which General Conway moved, that it should be resolved, "That it was the opinion of that house, that the farther prosecution of offensive war on the continent of North America, for the purpose of reducing the revolted colonies to obedience by force, would be the means of weakening the efforts of this country against her European enemies, and tend, under the present circumstances, dangerously to increase the mutual enmity so fatal to the interests both of Great Britain and America; and, by preventing a happy reconciliation with that country, to frustrate the earnest desire graciously expressed by his majesty to restore the blessings of public tranquility."

In the speech by which he introduced this motion, the general took notice of some objections that had been made to his former motion, under the idea that it was unconstitutional in that house to interfere with its advice in those things which especially and indisputably belonged to the executive power. It appeared, however, from the journals, that from the days of Edward III. down to the present reign, parliament had at all times given advice to the crown in matters relating to war and peace. In the reign of Richard II. it was frequently done; and also in that of Henry IV. One remarkable instance of this was in the reign of Henry VII. when that prince consulted his parliament respecting the propriety of supporting the duke of Brittany against France, and also of declaring war against the latter; and he told his parliament that it was for no other purpose than to hear their advice on these heads that he called them together. In the reign of James I. the parliament interfered repeatedly with their advice respecting the Palatinate, the match with Spain, and a declaration of war against that power. In the time of Charles I. there were similar interferences; and in the reign of his son Charles II. the parliament made repeated remonstrances, but particularly in 1674 and 1675, on the subject of the alliance with France, which they urged ought to be renounced, and at the same time recommended a strict union with the United Provinces. To some of these remonstrances, indeed, answers were returned not very satisfactory; and the parliament were informed, that they were exceeding the line of their duty, and encroaching upon the prerogative of the crown. But so little did the commons of those days relish these answers, that they addressed the king to know who it was that had advised his majesty to return such answers to their loyal and constitutional remonstrances. In the reign of King William, repeated instances were to be found in the journals, of advice given by parliament relative to the Irish war and the war on the continent. The like occurred frequently in the reign of Queen Anne: that princes, in an address from the parliament, was advised, not to make peace with France until Spain should be secured to Austria; and also, not to consent to peace until Dunkirk should be demolished. In short, it was manifest from the whole history of English parliaments, that it was ever considered as constitutional for parliament to interfere, whenever it thought proper, in all matters so important as those of peace and war. The general urged other arguments in support of his motion, which was seconded by Lord Althorpe; and petitions from the mayor, burgesses, and commonalty of the city of Bristol, and from the merchants, tradesmen, and inhabitants of that city, against the American war, were read. In order to evade coming to any immediate determination on the question, a proposition was made by Mr Wal- lace, the attorney-general, that a truce should be entered into with America; and that a bill should be prepared to enable his majesty's ministers to treat on this ground: and under the pretence of allowing time for this measure, he moved, "that the present debate should be adjourned for a fortnight." The house divided upon this motion, when there appeared for it 215, and against it 234; so that there was a majority of 19 against the minister. The original motion of General Conway was then put and carried without a division. The general immediately followed up his first motion with another for an address to the king, in which the American war was spoken of precisely in the same terms made use of in the motion, and in which his majesty was solicited to put a stop to any farther prosecution of offensive war against the colonies. This motion was agreed to; and it was also resolved, that the address should be presented to his majesty by the whole house. The address was accordingly presented on the first of March; when his majesty returned an answer, in which he declared, that there were no objects nearer to his heart than the ease, happiness, and prosperity of his people; that the house of commons might be assured, that, in pursuance of their advice, he should take such measures as should appear to him to be most conducive to the restoration of harmony between Great Britain and her revolted colonies, so essential to the prosperity of both; and that his efforts should be directed, in the most effectual manner, against our European enemies, until such a peace could be obtained as should conduce with the interests and permanent welfare of his kingdoms. But though the proceedings of the house of commons, in addressing his majesty against any farther prosecution of the American war, gave general satisfaction, the royal answer, however, was not thought sufficiently explicit. It was therefore observed by General Conway, in the house of commons, on the 4th of March, that he hoped he should be supported by the house in his desire of securing the nation against the possibility of a doubt that the American war was not now completely concluded. Something, perhaps, might yet be wanting, by which ministers might be so expressly bound, that, however desirous of evasion, they would not have it in their power to evade the injunction of that house. He therefore moved, "That an humble address should be presented to his majesty, to return his majesty the thanks of that house for his gracious answer to their last address; that house being convinced, that nothing could, in the present circumstances of this country, so essentially promote those great objects of his majesty's paternal care for his people as the measures which his faithful commons had most humbly, but earnestly, recommended to his majesty." This motion was unanimously agreed to; after which the general made a second motion, that it should be resolved by that house, "That, after the solemn declaration of the opinion of that house, in their humble address presented to his majesty on Friday last, and his majesty's assurance of his gracious intentions, that house would consider as enemies to his majesty and this country, all those who should endeavour to frustrate his majesty's paternal care for the ease and happiness of his people, by advising, or by any means attempting, the farther prosecution of offensive war on the continent of North America, for the purpose of reducing the revolted colonies to obedience by force."

After some debate, the motion was agreed to without a division; and on the 6th of the month, after a number of papers had been read in the house of peers relative to the surrender of Earl Cornwallis and the army under his command, the two following motions were made by the duke of Chandos. First, "That it was the opinion of that house, that the immediate cause of the capture of the army under Earl Cornwallis in Virginia, appeared to have been the want of a sufficient naval force to cover and protect the same;" and, Secondly, "That the not covering and protecting the army under Earl Cornwallis in a proper manner, was highly blameable in those who advised and planned the expedition." After some debate, the motions were rejected, upon a division, by a majority of 72 to 37.

Thus the ministry still kept their ground, and with the most astonishing resolution combated the powers of opposition, which were daily increasing. On the 8th of March several resolutions were moved by Lord John Cavendish; one of which was, that "the chief cause against all the national misfortunes was the want of foresight and ability in his majesty's ministers." Another respected the immense sum expended on the war, which was not denied to be less than 100 millions. The expenditure of this sum became an object of severe scrutiny; but still all inquiry was frustrated. Mr Burke affirmed, that all public documents relative to the finances, exhibited the mismanagement, profusion, and enormities, of an unprincipled administration; as an instance of which he adduced the presents given to the Indians for their services during the last year, amounting to no less than 100,000l. Several other particulars were pointed out; but the motions were lost by 226 to 216.

The unpopularity of Lord North was now farther augmented by his proposal of some new taxes, particularly on soap, the carriage of goods, and places of entertainment. Opposition therefore still determined to force him to resign; which indeed it seemed improbable that he would voluntarily do. On the 15th of March it was moved by Sir John Rous, that "the nation could have no farther confidence in the ministers who had the conduct of public affairs." The debate against the motion was remarkable for an argument, in the affairs of America, perfectly original, and unprecedented in all that had been said or written on the subject. Sir James Marriot informed the house, that though it had been frequently pretended, that the inhabitants of the colonies were not represented in the British parliament, yet the fact was otherwise; for they were actually represented. The first colonization, by national and sovereign authority, he remarked, was the establishment of the colony of Virginia. The grants and charters made of those lands, and of all the subsequent colonies, were of one tenor, and expressed in the following terms: "To have and to hold of the king or queen's majesty, as part and parcel of the manor of East Greenwich, within the county of Kent, reddendum, a certain rent at our castle of East Greenwich, &c." So that the inhabitants of America were, in fact, by the nature of their tenure, represented in parliament by the knights of the shire of the county of Kent. This curious le- gal discovery, that the American colonies were part and parcel of the manor of East Greenwich, though delivered by the learned judge with all proper gravity and solemnity, yet excited so much merriment in the house, that it was with great difficulty, for some time, that the speaker could preserve any kind of order.

Lord North endeavoured to vindicate his own administration. He affirmed, that it could not be declared with truth, by that house, that the national calamities originated from the measures of the present administration. The repeal of the American stamp-act, and the passing of the declaratory law, took place before his entrance into office. As a private member of parliament, he gave his vote in favour of both; but, as a minister, he was not responsible for either. When he accepted his post, the times were scarcely less violent than the present. He approached the helm when others had deserted it; and, standing there, he had used his utmost efforts to assist his country. That the American war was just and requisite, and prosecuted for the purpose of supporting and maintaining the rights of the British legislature, was a position, for the truth of which he would ever contend, whilst he enjoyed the power of arguing at all upon the subject. As to peace, he not only wished most earnestly for it, but also for the formation of such a ministry as might at once prove welcome to the country, and with unanimous cordiality cooperate for the welfare and the honour of the state. It was not an attachment to the honours and emoluments of office which had kept him so long in place; and he should disdain to throw impediments in the way of any honourable and salutary coalition of parties, though for the adjustment of an administration from which he might perceive himself excluded. The house at length divided upon the question, when there appeared for it 227, and against it 236; so that there was a majority of nine in favour of administration.

Notwithstanding this seemingly favourable determination, it was so well known that the ministry could not stand their ground, that, four days after, a similar motion to that made by Sir John Rous was to have been made by the earl of Surrey; but when his lordship was about to rise for that purpose, Lord North addressed himself to the speaker, and endeavoured to gain the attention of the house. This occasioned some altercation, it being contended by many members, that the earl of Surrey ought to be heard first. But Lord North being at length suffered to proceed, he observed, that as he understood the motion to be made by the noble earl was similar to that made a few days before, and the object of which was the removal of the ministers, he had such information to communicate to the house, as must, he conceived, render any such motion now unnecessary. He could with authority assure the house, that his majesty had come to a full determination to change his ministers. Indeed, those persons who had for some time conducted the public affairs were no longer his majesty's ministers. They were not now to be considered as men holding the reins of government, and transacting measures of state, but merely remaining to do their official duty, till other ministers were appointed to take their places. The former those new ministers were appointed, his lordship declared, that, in his opinion, the better it would be for the public business, and the general interests of the nation. He returned thanks to the house for the many instances of favour and indulgence which he had received from them during the course of his administration; and he declared, that he considered himself as responsible, in all senses of the word, for every circumstance of his ministerial conduct, and that he should be ready to answer to his country whenever he should be called upon for that purpose.

The earl of Surrey informed the house, that the motion which he intended to have made was designed to declare to the nation, and to all Europe, that the ministry were not dismissed because they wanted to avoid the fatigues of office, but because the parliament had totally withdrawn from them their good opinion and their confidence, and were determined no longer to permit the perpetration of those violent abuses of their trust, to which, with impunity, and to the disgrace and detriment of the state, they had for such a length of time proceeded. His lordship, however, agreed, in consequence of the declaration of Lord North, to wave his intended motion; and, after some farther debate, the house adjourned.

Thus an end was put to an administration which had for so long been obnoxious to a great part of the nation, and whose removal contributed very much to all-inlay those dangerous ferments by which every part of the British dominions had been so long agitated. Peace now became as much the object of ministry as war had been formerly. Before we proceed to any account of the negociation for that desirable event, however, it will be necessary to take notice of those military events which disposed the other belligerent powers to an accommodation. The bad success of Britain in America has already been taken notice of. The disaster of Cornwallis had produced a sincere desire of being at peace with America: but that could not be accomplished without making peace with France also; and that power was hasty and elated with successes. Minorca had now fallen into the hands of the Spaniards; and though it is certain that the capture of a few miserable invalids, attended with such extreme difficulty as the Spaniards experienced, ought rather to have intimidated them than otherwise, they now projected the most important conquests. Nothing less than the entire reduction of the British West India islands became the object of the allies; and indeed there was too much reason to suppose that this object was within their reach. In the beginning of the year 1782, the islands of Nevis and St Christopher's were obliged to surrender to M. de Grasse the French admiral, and the marquis de Bouille, who had already signalized himself by several exploits. Jamaica was marked out as the next victim; but an end of all these aspiring hopes was fast approaching. The advantages hitherto gained by the French in their naval engagements with the British fleet had proceeded from their keeping at a great distance during the time of action, and from their good fortune, and dexterity in gaining the wind. At last, the French admiral, de Grasse, probably prompted by his natural courage, determined, after an indecisive action on the 9th of April 1782, to stand a close engagement with his formidable antagonist Admiral Rodney. This, with him, appears to have been a matter of choice, as he interfered to prevent... vent the loss of a disabled ship, by parting with which he might have avoided the disaster that followed. This memorable engagement took place off the island of Dominica, three days after the former. The British fleet consisted of 37 ships of the line, and the French of 34. The engagement commenced at seven o'clock in the morning, and continued with unremitting fury till half past six in the evening. It is said, that no other signal was made by the admiral but the general one for action, and that for close fight. Sir George Rodney was on board the Formidable, a ship of 92 guns; and the count de Grasse was on board the Ville de Paris, a ship of 110 guns, which was a present to the French king from the city of Paris. In the course of the action, the Formidable fired nearly 80 broadsides; and for three hours the admiral's ship was involved in so thick a cloud of smoke, that it was almost invisible to the officers and men of the rest of the fleet. The van division of the British fleet was commanded by Sir Samuel Hood, and the rear division by Rear-admiral Drake; and both these officers greatly distinguished themselves in this important action. But the decisive turn on this memorable day was given by a bold manoeuvre of the Formidable, which broke the French line, and threw them into confusion. The first French ship that struck was the César, a 74 gun ship, the captain of which fought nobly, and fell in the action. It is said, that when she struck she had not a foot of canvas without a shot hole. Unfortunately, soon after she was taken possession of, she took fire by accident, and blew up, when about 200 Frenchmen perished in her, together with an English lieutenant and ten English seamen. But le Glorieux and le Hector, both 74 gun ships, were also taken by the British fleet; together with l'Ardent of 64 guns; and a French 74 gun ship was also sunk in the engagement. It was a very close and hard fought action on both sides, but the French fleet was at length totally defeated. It was almost dark when the Ville de Paris struck, on board which the count de Grasse had fought very gallantly. Five thousand five hundred troops were on board the French fleet, and the havoc among them was very great, as well as among the French seamen. The British had 230 killed and 759 wounded. Captain Blair, who commanded the Anson, and several other officers, were killed in the action; and Lord Robert Manners, who commanded the Resolution, died of his wounds on his return home. On the 19th of the same month, a squadron which was detached from the main fleet, under the command of Sir Samuel Hood, captured the Cato and the Japon, two French men of war of 64 guns each, and also l'Aimable of 32 guns, and the Ceres of 18. About the same time also the fleet under Admiral Barrington took from the French, off Ushant, le Pegase of 74 guns, l'Actionnaire of 64, and ten sail of vessels under their convoy.

It was universally allowed, that in this engagement the French, notwithstanding their defeat, behaved with the greatest valour. De Grasse himself did not surrender till 400 of his people were killed, and only himself and two others remained without a wound. The captain of the César, after his ensign-staff was shot away, and the ship almost battered to pieces, caused his colours to be nailed to the mast, and thus continued fighting till he was killed. The vessel, when taken, was a mere wreck. Other French officers behaved in the same manner. The valour of the British requires no encomium; it was evident from their success.

This victory was a very fortunate circumstance both for the interest and reputation of the British admiral. Before this event, the new ministry had appointed Admiral Pigot to supersede him in the command in the West Indies; and it was understood, that they meant to set on foot a rigid inquiry into the transactions at St Eustatius. But the splendour of this victory put an end to all thoughts of that kind: he received the thanks of both houses of parliament for his services; and was created an English peer, by the title of Baron Rodney, of Rodney Stoke, in the county of Somerset. Sir Samuel Hood was also created Baron Hood of Cathe-rington, in the kingdom of Ireland; and Rear-admiral Drake, and Captain Affleck, were created baronets of Great Britain. Some attempts were also made, in the house of commons, to procure a vote of censure against the new ministry, for having recalled Lord Rodney; but the motions made for this purpose were rejected by the majority.

The count de Grasse, after his defeat, was received on board the Barfleur man of war, and afterwards landed on the island of Jamaica, where he was treated with great respect. After continuing there some time, he was conveyed to England, and accommodated with a suit of apartments at the Royal Hotel in Pall-mall. His sword, which he had delivered up, according to the usual custom, to Admiral Rodney, was returned to him by the king. This etiquette enabled him to appear at court, where he was received by their majesties and the royal family in a manner suitable to his rank. From the time of his arrival in London to his departure, which was on the 12th of August 1782, he was visited by many persons of the first fashion and distinction, and was much employed in paying visits to the great officers of state, and some of the principal nobility of the kingdom, by whom he was entertained in a very sumptuous and hospitable style. He received, indeed, every mark of civility which the British nation could bestow; and was treated with much respect even by the common people, from the opinion that was generally entertained of his valour and merit.

Though the designs of the French against Jamaica were now effectually frustrated, the victory was not followed by those beneficial consequences which by many were expected. None of the British islands which had been taken by the French in the West Indies were afterwards recaptured; though it was hoped that this would have been the result of our naval superiority in those seas. It was also an unfortunate circumstance, that some of those ships which were taken by Admiral Rodney were afterwards lost at sea; particularly the Ville de Paris, Glorieux, and Hector. A British man of war, the Centaur, of 74 guns, was also sunk in lat. 48 deg. 33 min. and long. 43 deg. 20 min. on the 24th of September 1782, in consequence of the disabled state to which it was reduced by some very violent storms. Before the ship sunk, the officers and crew had sustained great hardships: most of them at last went down with the ship; but the lives of Captain Inglefield the commander, and ten other officers and seamen, were preserved by their getting on board a pinnace. But even this was leaky; and when they Britain went into it they were nearly in the middle of the Western ocean, without compass, quadrant, great coat or cloak; all very thinly clothed, in a gale of wind, and with scarcely any provisions. After undergoing extreme hardships and fatigues for 16 days, they at length reached the island of Fayall, one of the Azores. They were so much reduced by want of food and incessant labour, that, after they had landed, some of the stoutest men belonging to the Centaur were obliged to be supported through the streets of Fayall. The Jamaica homeward-bound fleet was also dispersed this year by a hurricane off the banks of Newfoundland, when the Ramillies of 74 guns and several merchantmen foundered.

The British navy also sustained, about this time, a considerable loss at home, by the Royal George, of 100 guns, being overflown and sunk at Portsmouth. This melancholy accident, which happened on the 29th of August, was occasioned by a partial heel being given to the ship, with a view to cleanse and sweeten her; but the guns on one side being removed to the other, or at least the greater part of them, and her lower deck ports not being lashed in, and the ship thwarting on the tide with a squall from the north-west, she filled with water, and sunk in the space of about three minutes. Admiral Kempenfelt, a very brave and meritorious officer, other officers, upwards of 400 seamen and 200 women, besides many children, perished in her.

Thus the prosecution of the war seemed to be attended with endless disasters and difficulties to all parties. The signal defeat above mentioned not only secured the island of Jamaica effectually from the attempts of the French, but prevented them from entertaining any other project than that of distressing the commerce of individuals. In the beginning of May an expedition was undertaken to the remote and inhospitable regions of Hudson's Bay; and though no force existed in that place capable of making any resistance, a 74 gun ship and two 36 gun frigates were employed on the service. All the people in that part of the world either fled or surrendered at the first summons. The loss of the Hudson's Bay company, on this occasion, amounted to 500,000l.; but the humanity of the French commander was conspicuous, in leaving a sufficient quantity of provisions and stores of all kinds for the use of the British who had fled at his approach.

Another expedition was undertaken by the Spaniards to the Bahama islands, where a like easy conquest was obtained. The island of Providence was defended only by 360 men, who being attacked by 5000, could make no resistance. A very honourable capitulation was granted by the victors, who likewise treated the garrison with great kindness afterwards. Some settlements on the Molquito shore were also taken by the Spaniards; but the Bay-men, assisted by their negroes, bravely retook some of them; and having formed a little army with the Indians in those parts, headed by Colonel Delpard, they attacked and carried the posts on the Black River, making prisoners of about 800 Spanish troops. The great disaster which befell this power, however, was their failure before Gibraltar, which happened in the month of September 1782, with such circumstances of horror and destruction as evinced the absurdity of persisting in the enterprise. Thus all parties were taught that it was high time to put an end to their contests. The affair of Cornwallis had shown that it was impossible for Britain to conquer America; the defeat of de Grasse had rendered the reduction of the British possessions in the West Indies impracticable by the French; the final repulse before Gibraltar, and its relief afterwards by the British fleet *, put an end * See Gi- to that favourite enterprise, in which almost the whole strength of Spain was employed; while the engagement of the Dutch with Admiral Parker showed them that nothing could be gained by a naval war with Britain.

We have already taken notice, as fully as the limits of this article would admit, of the events which led to the removal of Lord North and the other ministers who for so long a time had directed public measures in this kingdom. On this occasion it was said that his majesty expressed a considerable agitation of mind at being in a manner compelled to make such an entire change in his councils: for the members in opposition would form no coalition with any of the old ministry, the lord chancellor only excepted. On the 29th and 30th of March 1782, the marquis of Rockingham was appointed first lord of the treasury; Lord John Cavendish chancellor of the exchequer; the earl of Shelburne and Mr Fox principal secretaries of state; Lord Camden president of the council; the duke of Richmond master of the ordnance; the duke of Grafton lord privy seal; Admiral Keppel first lord of the admiralty; General Conway commander in chief of all the forces in Great Britain; Mr Thomas Townshend secretary at war; Mr Burke paymaster of the forces; and Colonel Barré treasurer of the navy. Other offices and honours were likewise conferred on different members of the opposition; and some were raised to the peerage, particularly Admiral Keppel, Sir Fletcher Norton, and Mr Dunning.

The first business in which the new ministry engaged, was the taking such measures as were proper to put an end to the peace, pursuant of this great object, or in taking the necessary steps for its attainment. Accordingly, the empress of Russia, having offered her mediation, in order to restore peace between Great Britain and Holland, Mr Secretary Fox, within two days after his entrance in office, wrote a letter to Mons. Simolin, the Russian minister in London, informing him, that his majesty was ready to enter into a negotiation for the purpose of setting on foot a treaty of peace, on the terms and conditions of which that was agreed to in 1674 between his majesty and the republic of Holland; and that, in order to facilitate such a treaty, he was willing to give immediate orders for a suspension of hostilities, if the States-general were disposed to agree to that measure.

But the states of Holland did not appear inclined to a separate peace; nor perhaps would it have been agreeable to the principles of sound policy, if they had agreed to any proposition of this kind. However, immediately after the change of ministry, negotiations for a general peace were commenced at Paris. Mr Grenville was invested with full powers to treat with all the parties at war; and was also directed to propose the independence of the 13 United Provinces of America, in the first instance, instead of making it a condition of a general treaty. Admiral Digby and General Carleton were... were also directed to acquaint the American congress with the pacific views of the British court, and with the offer that was made to acknowledge the independence of the United States.

But before this work of pacification had made any considerable progress, the new ministry sustained an irreparable loss by the death of the marquis of Rockingham in July 1782. Even before this event, considerable apprehensions were entertained of their want of union; but the death of the nobleman just mentioned occasioned an absolute dissolution. The earl of Shelburne, who succeeded him as first lord of the treasury, proved so disagreeable to some of his colleagues, that Mr Fox, Lord John Cavendish, Mr Burke, Mr Frederick Montague, and two or three others, instantly resigned their places. Others, however, though little attached to the earl, kept their places; and his lordship found means to attach to his interest Mr William Pitt, son to the late earl of Chatham. Though then in an early stage of life, that gentleman had distinguished himself greatly in parliament, and was now prevailed upon to accept the office of chancellor. The feeding members of the cabinet were at pains to explain their motives to the house for taking this step. There were in general a suspicion that matters would be managed differently from the plan they had proposed while in office, and particularly that American independence would not be allowed; but this was positively denied at the time; and with truth, as appeared by the event. There appeared indeed a duplicity in the conduct of the earl of Shelburne not easily to be accounted for. Even after it had been intimated by General Carleton and Admiral Digby, that the independence of the United Provinces should be granted by his majesty in the first instance, instead of making it a condition of a provisional treaty, his lordship expressed himself to the following purpose: "He had formerly been, and still was, of opinion, that whenever the independence of America was acknowledged by the British parliament, the fun of England's glory was set for ever. This had been the opinion of Lord Chatham and other able statesmen; nevertheless, as the majority of the cabinet were of a contrary opinion, he acquiesced in the measure, though his ideas were different. He did not wish to see England's fun set for ever, but looked for a spark to be left which might light us up a new day. He wished God that he had been deputed to congress, that he might plead the cause of America as well as Britain. He was convinced that the liberties of the former were gone as soon as the independence of the states was allowed; and he concluded his speech with observing, that he was not afraid of his expressions being repeated in America; there being great numbers there who were of the same opinion with him, and perceived ruin and independence linked together."

If his lordship really was of opinion that his oratorial powers were able to persuade the Americans out of a system for which they had fought so desperately for a number of years, it is much to be feared he overrated them. No obstruction, however, arose to the general pacification. As early as November 30, 1782, the articles of a provisional treaty were settled between Britain and America*. By these it was stipulated, that the people of the United States should continue to enjoy, without molestation, the right to take fish of every kind on the grand bank, and on all the other banks of Newfoundland; and that they should likewise exercise and continue the same privilege in the gulf of St Lawrence, and at every other place where the inhabitants used heretofore to fish. The inhabitants of the United States were likewise America to have the liberty to take fish of every kind on such part of the coasts of Newfoundland as British seamen shall resort to; but not to cure or dry them on that island. They were also to possess the privilege of fishing on the coasts, bays, and creeks of the other dominions of his Britannic majesty in America; and the American fishermen were permitted to cure and dry fish in any of the unsettled bays, harbours, and creeks of Nova Scotia, Magdalen islands, and Labrador. But it was agreed, that, after such places should be settled, this right could not be legally put in practice without the consent of the inhabitants and proprietors of the ground. It was accorded, that creditors upon either side should meet with no impediment in the prosecution of their claims. It was contracted, that the congress should earnestly recommend it to the legislatures of the respective states, to provide for the restitution of all estates and properties which had been confiscated, belonging to real British subjects, and of the estates and properties of persons resident in districts in the possession of his majesty's arms, and who had not borne arms against the United States. It was resolved, that persons of any other description should have free liberty to go to any part whatsoever of any of the thirteen united states, and remain in it for twelve months unmolested in their endeavours to recover such of their estates, rights, and properties, as might not have been confiscated; and it was concerted that the congress should earnestly recommend to the several states a revision of all acts or laws regarding the premises, so as to render them perfectly consistent, not only with justice and equity, but with that spirit of conciliation which, on the return of the blessing of peace, should universally prevail. It was understood that no future confiscations should be made, nor prosecutions commenced against any person, or body of men, on account of the part which he or they had taken in the present war; and that those who might be in confinement on such a charge, at the time of the ratification of the treaty in America, should be immediately set at liberty. It was concluded that there should be a firm and perpetual peace between his Britannic majesty and the United States; that all hostilities by sea and land should immediately cease; and that prisoners on both sides should be set at liberty. It was determined that his Britannic majesty should expeditiously, and without committing destruction of any fort, withdraw all his armies, garrisons, and fleets, from every port, place, and harbour, of the United States. The navigation of the river Mississippi, from its source to the ocean, was to remain for ever free and open to the subjects of Great Britain and the citizens of the United States. In fine, it was agreed in the event, that if any place or territory belonging to Great Britain, or to the United States, should be conquered by the arms of either before the arrival of the provisional articles in America, it should be restored without compensation or difficulty.

In the treaty between Great Britain and France, it was was agreed that Newfoundland should remain with England, as before the commencement of the war; and to prevent disputes about boundaries, it was accorded that the French fishery should begin from Cape St John on the eastern side, and going round by the north, should have for its boundary Cape Ray on the western side. The islands of St Pierre and Miquelon, which had been taken in September 1778, were ceded in full right to France. The French were to continue to fish in the gulf of St Lawrence, conformably to the fifth article of the treaty of Paris. The king of Great Britain was to restore to France the island of St Lucia, and to cede and guarantee to her that of Tobago. The king of France was to surrender to Great Britain the islands of Grenada and the Grenadines, St Vincent, Dominica, St Christopher's, Nevis, and Montserrat. The river of Senegal and its dependencies, with the forts of St Louis, Podor, Galam, Arguin, and Portendice, were to be given to France; and the island of Goree was to be restored to it. Fort James and the river Gambia were guaranteed to his Britannic majesty; and the gum trade was to remain in the same condition as before the commencement of hostilities. The king of Great Britain was to restore to his most Christian majesty all the establishments which belonged to him at the breaking out of the war on the coast of Orixa and in Bengal, with the liberty to surround Chandernagore with a ditch for draining the waters; and became engaged to secure to the subjects of France in that part of India, and on the coasts of Orixa, Coromandel, and Malabar, a safe, free, and independent trade, either as private traders, or under the direction of a company. Pondicherry, as well as Karikal, was to be rendered back to France; and his Britannic majesty was to give as a dependency round Pondicherry the two districts of Valanour and Bahrour; and as a dependency round Karikal, the four contiguous Magans. The French were again to enter into the possession of Mahe, and of the comptoir at Surat. The allies of France and Great Britain were to be invited to accede to the present pacification; and the term of four months was to be allowed them, for the purpose of making their decision. In the event of their aversion from peace, no affluence on either side was to be given to them. Great Britain renounced every claim with respect to Dunkirk. Commissioners were to be appointed respectively by the two nations to inquire into the state of their commerce, and to concert new arrangements of trade on the footing of mutual convenience. All conquests on either side, in any part of the world whatsoever, not mentioned or alluded to in the present treaty, were to be restored without difficulty, and without requiring compensation. It was determined that the king of Great Britain should order the evacuation of the islands of St Pierre and Miquelon, three months after the ratification of the preliminary treaty, and that, if possible, before the expiration of the same period, he should relinquish all connexion with St Lucia in the West Indies, and Goree in Africa. It was stipulated in like manner, that his Britannic majesty should at the end of three months after the ratification of the treaty, or sooner, enter into the possession of the islands of Grenada and the Grenadines, St Vincent, Dominica, St Christopher's, Nevis, and Montserrat. France was to be put into possession of the towns and comptoirs Britain, which were to be restored to her in the East Indies, and of the territories which were to serve as dependencies round Pondicherry and round Karikal, six months after the ratification of the definitive treaty; and at the termination of the same term was to restore the towns and districts which her arms might have taken from the English or their allies in that quarter of the globe. The prisoners upon each side were reciprocally to be surrendered, and without ransom, upon the ratification of the treaty, and on paying the debts they might have contracted during their captivity. Each crown was respectively to reimburse the sums which had been advanced for the maintenance of their prisoners by the country where they had been detained, according to attested and authentic vouchers. With a view to prevent every dispute and complaint on account of prizes which might be made at sea after the signing of the preliminary articles, it was mutually settled and understood that the vessels and effects which might be taken in the Channel, and in the North seas, after the space of twelve days, to be computed from the ratification of the present preliminary articles, were to be restored upon each side; that the term should be one month from the Channel and the North seas, as far as the Canary islands inclusively, whether in the ocean or the Mediterranean; two months from the Canary islands as far as the equinoctial line or equator; and lastly, five months without exception in all other parts of the world.

These preliminary articles of peace were concluded at Versailles on the 20th of January 1783, between Mr Alleyne Fitzherbert, minister plenipotentiary on the part of his Britannic majesty, and Charles Gravier, comte de Vergennes, the minister plenipotentiary on the part of the king of France. At the same time the preliminary articles of peace between Great Britain and Spain were also concluded at Versailles between Mr Fitzherbert and the comte d'Aranda, the minister plenipotentiary for the Spanish monarch. It was agreed that a sincere friendship should be re-established between his Britannic majesty and his Catholic majesty, their kingdoms, states, and subjects, by sea and land, in all parts of the world. His Catholic majesty was to keep the island of Minorca; and was to retain West Florida. East Florida was to be ceded to him by the king of Great Britain. Eighteen months from the date of the ratification of the definitive treaty were to be allowed to the subjects of the latter who had settled in the island of Minorca and in the two Floridas, to sell their effects, to recover their debts, and to transport their persons and effects, without being restrained upon account of their religion, or on any other pretence whatsoever, except that of debts and prosecutions for crimes. His Britannic majesty was, at the same time, to have the power to cause all the effects that might belong to him in East Florida, whether artillery or others, to be carried away. The liberty of cutting logwood, in a district of which the boundaries were to be ascertained, without molestation or disturbance of any kind whatsoever, was permitted to Great Britain. The king of Spain was to restore the islands of Providence and the Bahamas, without exception, in the condition in which they were when they were conquered by his arms. All other conquests of territories... Britain, tories and countries upon either side, not included in the present articles, were to be mutually restored without difficulty or compensation. The epoch for the restitutions to be made, and for the evacuations to take place, the regulations for the release of prisoners, and for the cessation of captures, were exactly the same as those which have already been related, as stipulated in the preliminary articles with France.

No sooner were these articles ratified and laid before parliament, than the most vehement declamations against ministry took place. Never had the administration of Lord North himself been arraigned with more asperity of language. The ministry defended themselves with great resolution; but found it impossible to avoid the censure of parliament. An address without any amendment was indeed carried in the house of lords by 72 to 59; but in the lower house it was lost by 224 to 208. On the 21st of February, some resolutions were moved in the house of commons by Lord George Cavendish, of which the most remarkable were, that the concessions made by Britain were greater than its adversaries had a right to expect; and that the house would take the case of the American loyalists into consideration. The last motion indeed his lordship consented to wave; but all the rest were carried against ministry by 207 to 190. These proceedings, however, could make no alteration with regard to the treaty, which had already been ratified by all the contending powers, the Dutch only excepted. The terms offered them were a renewal of the treaty of 1674; which, though the most advantageous they could possibly expect, were positively refused at that time. Afterwards they made an offer to accept the terms they had formerly refused; but the compliment was then returned by a refusal on the part of Britain. When the preliminary articles were settled with the courts of France and Spain, a suspension of arms took place with Holland also; but though the definitive arrangements with the other powers were finally concluded by the month of September, it was not till then that the preliminary articles were settled with Holland. The terms were a general restitution of all places taken on both sides during the war, excepting only the settlement of Negapatnam in the East Indies, which was to remain in the hands of Britain, unless an equivalent was given on the part of Holland. The navigation of the eastern seas was to remain free and unmolested to all the British shipping. The other articles concerned only the exchange of prisoners and such other matters as are common to all treaties.

Thus an end was put to the most dangerous war in which Britain was ever engaged; and in which, notwithstanding the powerful combination against her, she still remained in a state of superiority to all her enemies. At that time, and ever since, it has appeared, how much the politicians were mistaken who imagined that the prosperity of Britain depended in a great measure on her colonies: Though for a number of years she had not only been deprived of these colonies, but opposed by them with all their force; though attacked at the same time by three of the greatest powers in Europe, and looked upon with an envious eye by all the rest; the damage done to her enemies still greatly exceeded that she had received. Their trade by sea was almost ruined; and on comparing the loss of ships on both sides, the balance in favour of Britain was 28 ships of the line and 37 frigates, carrying in all near 2000 guns. Notwithstanding this, however, the state of the nation appears to have been really such, that a much longer continuance of the war would have been impracticable. In the debates, which were kept Mr Pitt's up with the greatest violence on account of the peace, Mr Pitt set forth our situation with great energy and the strength of argument. "It was in vain (he said) to boast of the strength of our navy; we had not more than 100 sail of the line: but the fleets of France and Spain amounted nearly to 140 ships of the line. A destination of 72 ships of the line was to have acted against Jamaica. Admiral Pigot had only 46 sail to support it; and it was a favourite maxim of many members of the house, that defensive war must terminate in certain ruin. It was not possible that Admiral Pigot could have acted offensively against the islands of the enemy; for Lord Rodney, when flushed with victory, did not dare to attack them. Would Admiral Pigot have recovered by arms what the ministers had regained by negociation? With a superior fleet against him, and in its sight, is it to be conceived that he could have retaken Grenada, Dominica, St Christopher's, Nevis, and Montserrat? On the contrary, is it not more than probable that the campaign in the West Indies must have terminated in the loss of Jamaica?

"In the east, it was true that the services of Sir Edward Hughes had been highly extolled; but he could only be commended for a merely defensive resistance. Victory seemed to be out of the question; and he had not been able to prevent the disembarkation of a powerful European armament which had joined itself to Hyder Ally, and threatened the desolation of the Caribbees. At home and in our own seas, the fleets of the enemy would have been nearly double to ours. We might have seized the intervals of their cruise, and paraded the channel for a few weeks; but that parade would have only served to disgrace us. It was yet the only achievement in our power; for to have hazarded an engagement would have been equivalent to a surrender of the kingdom.

Neither, in his opinion, was the state of our army to be considered as formidable. New levies could not be raised in a depopulated country. We might send upon an offensive scheme five or six thousand men; and what expectation could be excited by a force of this kind? To have withdrawn troops from America was a critical game. There were no transports in which they might be embarked; and if it had been possible to embark them, in what miraculous manner were they to be protected against the fleets of the enemy.

As to our finances, they were melancholy. Let the immense extent of our debts be weighed; let our resources be considered; and let us then ask, what would have been the consequence of the protraction of the war? It would have endangered the bankruptcy of the public faith; and this bankruptcy, it is obvious, if it had come upon us, might have dissolved all the ties of government, and have operated to the general ruin.

To accept the peace on the terms already related, or to continue the war, was the only alternative in the power of ministers. Such was the ultimatum of France. At the same time, however, it ought to be remembered, ed, that the peace obtained was better than could have been expected from the lownefs of our condition. We had acknowledged the American independence; but what was that but an empty form? We had ceded Florida; but had we not obtained the islands of Providence and the Bahamas? We had granted an extent of fishery on the coast of Newfoundland; but had we not established an exclusive right to the most valuable banks? We had restored St Lucia, and given up Tobago; but had we not regained Grenada, Dominica, St Christopher's, Nevis, and Montserrat? And had we not rescued Jamaica from inevitable danger? In Africa we had given Goree; but Goree was the grave of our countrymen; and we had secured Fort James and the river Gambia, the best and the most healthy settlement. In Europe we had relinquished Minorca; but Minorca is not tenable in war, and in peace it must be supported at a ruinous expense. We had permitted the repartition of the port of Dunkirk; but Dunkirk could only be an object when ships of a far inferior draught to the present were in use; the change in the operations of naval war had taken away its importance. In the East Indies cessions had been made; but let it be remarked that these cessions are inconsiderable in themselves, and could not be protected by us in the event of hostilities. In fine, it was objected that we had abandoned the unhappy loyalists to their implacable enemies. What is this but to impute to congress by anticipation a violence which common decency forbids us to expect? But let it be considered, that the principle of afflicting these unfortunate men would not have justified ministers to have continued the war. And let it be considered, that a continuation of the war would not have procured them any certain indemnity. The accumulation of our difficulties must have added to theirs. A year or two hence, harder terms of peace might have been forced upon our acceptance. Their fate then must have been desperate indeed! But as matters were now situated, there were hopes of mercy and reconciliation."

Having thus given as full an account as our limits would allow of the great national events to the conclusion of the peace in 1783, we shall now give a detail of some others, which, though of sufficient importance to deserve notice, could not be previously inserted without interrupting the narrative. It has repeatedly been observed, that through the violence of parties, a general temper of distrust and suspicion took place throughout the nation, insomuch that the most improbable stories with respect to individuals began to gain credit, of which an instance was given in the case of Mr Sayre. From certain circumstances, however, it appeared, that there undoubtedly were persons in the kingdom who wished if possible to destroy the national strength in such a manner as to render it impossible for us to make head against the attempts of our enemies. On the 8th of December 1776, a fire broke out in the ropehouse of the dockyard at Portsmouth, which totally consumed it, but without doing any very material damage. For some time the affair passed as an accident; but in clearing away the rubbish, a tin-box was found with a wooden bottom, containing matches which had been lighted, and underneath was a vessel with spirits of wine: however, the fire not having been properly supplied with air, had extinguished of itself before it touched the spirit of wine. Had it caught fire, all the stores in the storehouse, sufficient to rig out 50 sail of men of war, would have been destroyed. In the beginning of the year 1777, a fire happened at Bristol, which consumed six or seven warehouses; and by the finding of machines similar to those already mentioned, it was evident that the fire had not been accidental. The terror of the public was now greatly increased, and the most violent accusations against each other were thrown out by the ministerial and popular parties. On this point, however, they soon came to a right understanding, by the discovery of the author of all this mischief. This was one James Aiken, alias John the Painter, a native of Edinburgh. Having been from his early years accustomed to a vagrant life, to which indeed his profession naturally led him, he had gone through many different adventures. He had enlisted as a soldier, deserted, and when pinched by want, made no scruple of betaking himself to the highway, or committing thefts. Having traversed a great part of America, he there imbibed the prejudices against Britain to such a degree, that he at last took the extraordinary resolution of singly overturning the whole power of the nation. This he was to accomplish by setting on fire the dockyards at Portsmouth and Plymouth, and afterwards the principal trading towns of the nation. With this view, he inspected with the utmost care those docks and other places on which his attempts were to be made, in order to learn with what care they were guarded. This he found in general as negligent as he could wish; and indeed had he not been some way or other very deficient in the construction of his machines, he must certainly have done a great deal of mischief; for as his attempts were always discovered by finding his machines, it was apparent that he had met with abundance of opportunities.

For some time the affair at Portsmouth passed, as it has already been mentioned, for an accident. It was pretended, soon recollected, however, that a person had been loitering about the rope-house, and had even been locked up one night in it; that he had worked as a painter, and taken frequent opportunities of getting into that house, &c. These circumstances exciting a suspicion that he was the incendiary, he was traced to different places, and at last found in a prison, to which he had been committed for a burglary. On his examination, however, he behaved with such assurance and apparent consciousness of innocence, as almost disconcerted those who were authorized to examine him. At last he was deceived into a confession by another painter, a native of America, who pretended to compassionate his case. Thus evidence was procured against him, but he still maintained his character to the very last; rejecting and invalidating the testimony of his false friend, on account of his baseness and treachery. He received his sentence with great fortitude; but at length not only confessed his guilt, but left some directions for preventing the dock-yards and magazines from being exposed to the like danger in time to come.

Thus it appeared that the whole of this alarm of treason and American incendiaries was owing to the political enthusiasm of a wretched vagabond. Still, however, it appeared that the French court were very well well acquainted with many particulars relating to the state of this kingdom, and the movements of our squadrons, which ought by all means to have been kept secret. These treacherous proceedings were first detected in the month of June 1782. One Ratcliffe, master of a cutter, gave information that he had been hired by one Mr Rogere to carry packets to France, for which he was to be paid 20l. each time, and to have 100l. besides at a certain period. Apprehending at last, however, that he might incur some danger by continuing this employment, he gave information of what was going on to one Mr Steward, a merchant at Sandwich, by whom his last packet was carried to the secretary of state. After being opened and sealed up again, it was returned, and he was directed to carry it to France as formerly. This was the fate of several succeeding packets, though it was some time before Ratcliffe saw the principal party concerned. At last this was accomplished by his complaining to Mr Rogere that he had not been paid the 100l. according to promise. A meeting being thus procured, it was found that the person who gave intelligence to the enemy was one M. Henry de la Motte, a French gentleman then residing in London. On searching his house, no papers of any consequence were found; but on his arrival, he being absent when the messengers first arrived, he threw some out of his pockets, unperceived by anybody, as he thought. The papers, however, were taken up by the messengers, and gave plain indications not only of a treasonable correspondence with the enemy, but that he was connected with one Henry Luterloch, Esq., a German, who then resided at Wickham near Portsmouth. This person being also apprehended, not only made a full discovery of the treasonable correspondence with France, but gave abundant proofs of himself being one of the most depraved and hardened of all mankind, lost to every sensation excepting the desire of accumulating wealth. His evidence, however, and other strong circumstances, were sufficient to convict M. de la Motte, who was accordingly executed, though the king remitted that dreadful part of his sentence, of having his heart taken out alive, &c. During his trial, and on every other occasion, he behaved in such a manner as showed him to be an accomplished gentleman; and not only excited the compassion, but the admiration of every one who saw him.

During the whole course of the war, only one other person was detected in any act of treason; and he appears to have been actuated merely by mercenary motives, though La Motte and John the Painter probably acted from principle. This was one David Tyrie, a native of Edinburgh. Having been bred in the mercantile line, and engaged in a number of speculations with a view to gain money, in all of which he discovered considerable abilities, he at last engaged in the dangerous one of conveying intelligence to the French of the ships of war fitted out in Britain, the time of their sailing, &c. For this he was apprehended in February 1782. The discovery was made by means of one Mrs Akew, who passed for his wife, having delivered a bundle of papers in a hurry to a schoolmistress, and desiring her not to show them to anybody. Instead of this, however, she not only inspected them herself, but showed them to another, by whom they were sent to the secretary at war. By this, and another packet discovered by William James, who had been employed to carry it to France, Tyrie was convicted and executed in the month of August 1782. He behaved with great resolution, and at the last showed rather an indecent levity and unconcern, by laughing at the place of execution. The sentence not only took place in the dreadful manner appointed by law, but the crowd behaved with the most shameful and unexampled barbarity. "Such (say the accounts of his execution) being the singular conduct of many who were near the body, that happy was he who could procure a finger, or some vestige of the criminal!"—This his executioner, contrived a method of effecting their escape, by working through a brick wall three feet thick, and covering the hole with a plank coloured like the bricks; but the scheme was discovered by the imprudence of Tyrie himself asking the keeper how thick the wall was.

On the whole, it appears that notwithstanding the excessive altercation and virulence of parties, which even went to such a length as to produce duels between some members of parliament, neither the one nor the other entertained any designs against what they believed to be the true interest of the nation. The one seems to have regarded its honour too much, and been inclined to sacrifice even its existence to that favourite notion; the other perhaps regarded the national honour too little; as indeed no advantageous idea could have been formed of the spirit of the nation which could submit to the dismemberment of its empire without any struggle. The event, however, has shown, that the loss of the colonies, so far from being a disadvantage, has been the very reverse. The commerce of Britain, instead of being dependent on America, has arrived at a much greater height than ever, while the consequent increase of wealth enabled the nation to support that enormous debt, great part of which has been contracted, first in defending, and then attempting to conquer the colonies.

Returning here to our narrative, it has been already remarked, that in the debates in the house of commons the treaties concluded under Lord Shelburne's administration, by which the American war was brought to a close, the terms of those treaties were disapproved of by the majority of the house, and this disapprobation was expressed by carrying an amendment to the ministerial motion for an address of thanks to his majesty. It does not appear, however, that the nation at large disapproved of the conditions of the peace. All ranks of men had long been weary of the war with the American colonies, and were willing to relinquish every claim of sovereignty over them. This point being decided, other objects of negociation were of too diminutive value to excite any great degree of public interest. The nature of the majority which now voted against administration, consisting of men brought together by views little connected with the accomplishment of any patriotic object, and in a manner which well merits the attention of the historian.

The death of the marquis of Rockingham left in a very disjointed state the party which opposed the American war. Lord Shelburne's administration appears to have been formed under the influence of the crown alone, alone, to the exclusion of Lord North and his friends, as well as of Mr Fox and the other principal members of the former opposition. Thus an attempt appears to have been made to govern the kingdom without supporting the royal prerogative by the strength of any faction or political party. Here, however, an event occurred of a nature undoubtedly not a little dangerous to the constitution; but which, being new in itself, seems not to have been foreseen by speculative writers upon the British government.

The American war was conducted with a profusion of expense totally unexampled in former wars. The service of government became of itself an immense object of trade, or an employment in which thousands of all kinds of artists, manufacturers, and merchants, were engaged. The patronage enjoyed by the minister for the time was proportionally extensive. In consequence of this circumstance, he and his friends, and a long train of their friends and dependants, were enabled to accumulate great wealth, and rose to the enjoyment of influence in all parts of the country. The impracticability of accomplishing the great object of the war at last led to its termination; and the minister who had been unsuccessful in conducting it was dismissed, as had usually been done upon such occasions in Britain, to make way for his antagonists, who had long recommended, and who could, therefore, with a better grace, adopt measures of pacification. But the dismission of the minister and his friends from their official situations, did not at once destroy their political importance in the state. They constituted a very formidable body of men in both houses of parliament; and such was the influence which the possession of power had conferred upon Lord North, that to the latest period of his life he was understood to be able to carry along with him, at all times, upwards of 40 votes in the house of commons. Such a power was evidently of a very dangerous nature, to be attached to a subject of a free state; and so indeed it proved to be.

Mr Fox, and the other gentlemen who had led the opposition to Lord North's measures during the American war, but who had retired from administration on the accession of Lord Shelburne to the place of first lord of the treasury, after the death of the marquis of Rockingham, appear to have at last become weary of an unprofitable opposition, and to have become eager, upon almost any terms, to enter into the enjoyment of power. This passion had probably been augmented in their minds by the short gratification of it under the marquis of Rockingham. But their party, though possessing very great talents, was too weak, in point of numbers, to be able to contend against the minister of the day, supported by the whole patronage of the crown. On the other hand, though Lord North and his friends formed in both houses of parliament a very formidable phalanx, still they also were too few to contend against ministerial influence, and what were in these days usually called the king's friends. From the natural course of things they might also expect that their numbers would gradually diminish. They had risen by attaching themselves to the service of the state; and the changes which mortality produces, would, by degrees, enable the existing government to supplant them by a new race of ambitious men.

In this state of affairs, the national business, exposed to the strict inspection of rival factions, could not fail to have been well conducted under the legitimate authority of the ministers of the crown; but such an experiment was not suffered to be tried. The two opposition parties, led by Lord North and Mr Fox, thought fit to come to an agreement to unite their strength, which would enable them to form a complete majority in parliament, and thus to impose themselves upon the sovereign, as the only men whom he could have the power of employing as his ministers. In this way the majority was produced which opposed Lord Shelburne's administration, and it has been since known under the appellation of the coalition.

The effect produced upon the public mind by this coalition was extremely important; and it is probable, that even at the end of twenty years its consequences are not entirely understood. In almost any other country than Britain, and at many former periods of tendency our history, such a combination of powerful men, professing a predominance in the legislature, could not fail to prove fatal to the constitution, and destructive of the internal tranquillity of the state. If the king gave way to such an aristocratical combination, and received its leaders into his service, it was to be feared, that by putting into their hands the whole patronage of the crown, together with the authority of the royal name, added to the majority which they already possessed in the rest of the legislature, they would speedily find means to fortify themselves by new institutions and laws, which would render them independent both of the king and people. No hope appeared from a dissolution of parliament, as the public at large were not at once aware of the critical situation into which the constitution had been brought by the coalition. A prince of a rash character, would, in such circumstances, perhaps, have seen no other resource for the protection of his own prerogative, than an attempt to govern without a parliament, the majority of which were evidently acting not the part of dutiful subjects or faithful representatives of the people, but of individuals conspiring to seize for their own private advantage, the emoluments and authority of office.

This judgment will not be regarded as too severe, when it is considered, that at this time no pretext for opposition to the crown existed, founded upon any complaint of the nation against the abuse of its prerogatives; and that the individuals who now united could not be induced to do so upon any footing of political principle. Lord North, the steady assertor and supporter of the royal prerogative, and the conductor of the American war, now joined Mr Fox, the opponent of that war, and the eloquent champion of the privileges of the people. Neither of these men, nor their friends, pretended that they had relinquished their former opinions. The purpose of the present union was therefore notorious. The outrageous abuse with which they had formerly treated each other, served only to afford a new example how completely ambition is capable of subduing every resentment, and all the ordinary passions of the human mind.

The party now called the coalition, had displayed the superiority of their numbers in the house of commons in the debates upon the treaty of peace in the middle of February. From that period, it was considered as obvi- ous, that a new administration must be formed. Hence from that time public business remained at a stand, and the nation was kept in suspense. The period was critical, on account of the termination of the war, at which great bodies of troops and seamen were to be discharged, and many pecuniary arrears paid off. The different regiments of militia were at this time disembodied, and sailors and soldiers dismissed in a state of turbulence, natural to men accustomed to arms, whose pay is not correctly paid. These and other circumstances, joined with the unsettled state of the government, produced various disorderly proceedings at Portsmouth, Plymouth, and other places. In the mean time, a loan could not be negotiated by the ministry while they wanted the countenance of the house of commons. They still, however, during the whole month of March, lingered in their places, and a variety of negotiations were carried on by the court for the purpose of attempting to form a new ministry, without an unconditional transfer of the government of the kingdom to the coalition. Confident of their own strength, however, this combination of men were desirous of attaining power upon their own terms, and continued to display their superiority in the house of commons, with a view to force their own reception at court. On the 24th of March, on the motion of Mr T. W. Coke, which was seconded by Lord Surrey, an address was voted, requesting his majesty to take into consideration the distracted state of the empire after an exhausting war, and to comply with the wishes of the house, by forming an administration entitled to the confidence of his people. His majesty answered, that it was his earnest desire to do every thing in his power to comply with the wishes of his faithful commons. The delay, however, continued, and all descriptions of men were involved in doubt, suspense, and anxiety. On the 31st of the same month, on the motion of Lord Surrey, a new address was voted, urging in very earnest terms the formation of what was called an "efficient and responsible administration, formed upon principles of strength and stability, suited to the state of his majesty's affairs both at home and abroad." At last, on the 2d of April, his majesty, yielding to what appeared necessity, appointed an administration consisting of the leaders of the coalition. The duke of Portland was promoted to be first lord of the treasury; Lord North and Mr Fox were appointed principal secretaries of state; Lord John Cavendish was made chancellor of the exchequer; Lord Keppel was made first lord of the admiralty; Lord Stormont was created president of the council, and the earl of Carlisle was advanced to be keeper of the privy-seal. These formed the cabinet; and the other offices of government were filled by their supporters and friends. The right honourable Charles Townshend was appointed treasurer of the navy; Mr Burke paymaster general of the forces; Lord Vifcount Townshend was made master-general of the ordnance. The seals were put in commission: At the head of the commission was Lord Loughborough. The right honourable Richard Fitzpatrick was appointed secretary at war; James Wallace, Esq., was made attorney-general; John Lee, Esq., solicitor-general; the earl of Northington was appointed lord-lieutenant of Ireland; and, in Scotland, the honourable Henry Erskine was made lord-advocate, in the room of Mr Henry Dundas.

The new administration was no sooner installed, than an opposition to it was formed, which, in the house of lords, was led by the duke of Richmond and lord milton, Lord Thurlow; and in the house of commons by Mr Pitt, and Mr Jenkinson, afterwards created, at different times, Lord Hawkebury and earl of Liverpool.

The new administration, on entering into office, were under the necessity of instantly negotiating a loan of twelve millions, to supply the necessities of the state. To provide for the interest of this loan various taxes were proposed by Lord John Cavendish, the chancellor of the exchequer. These were imposed on bills of exchange, receipts, probates of wills and legacies, bonds, and law proceedings, stage coaches, quack medicines, carriage, letters patent, &c.; registrars of births, marriages, and deaths, were also taxed. These taxes gave rise to debates which produced little interest. The case was otherwise, however, with regard to another subject in which Mr Pitt took the lead.

Towards the close of the American war, when want of success had begun to render it unpopular, it had repeatedly been urged both in parliament and in various publications, that the ministerial majorities in favour of the measures pursued against the colonies, would never have existed if the people of this country had been fairly represented in the house of commons. By degrees this sentiment attracted attention; and to give countenance to a parliamentary reform, came to be regarded as a sure step towards the attainment of popular favour. Accordingly, Mr Pitt, then a very young man, thought fit to endeavour to recommend himself to notice, by engaging eagerly in the pursuit of this object. He opened the subject in the house of commons on the Mr Pitt's 7th of May, with an eloquent speech, in which, after declaring his admiration of the general fabric of the British constitution, and that he wished not to alter but to restore its true spirit, which time and changes, accident and events, had enfeebled and diminished, he asserted, that the state of parliamentary representation was partial and inadequate, the progress of undue influence alarming and ominous; that the true spirit of liberty had decayed, and that the powers of control, in different branches of the government, were debilitated: that wild speculations of reform were afloat without doors; but that he was about to propose the most moderate and safe, but necessary measures. He stated his plan of reform under three resolutions: 1. That measures ought to be taken to prevent bribery and expense at elections. 2. That for the future, when the majority of voters of any borough should be convicted of notorious corruption, the borough should be disfranchised; and the minority of votes, not so convicted, should be entitled to vote for the county in which the borough might be situated. Lastly, That an addition ought to be made to the representation, to consist of knights of the shire, and of representatives of the metropolis. Mr Pitt was opposed with much earnestness by Lords North and Mulgrave, and also by Mr Powis. He was supported, however, by Mr Fox and Mr Beaufoy, and also by Mr Thomas Pitt, who offered, as a testimony of his sincerity, to make make a voluntary sacrifice of his borough of Old Sarum. Mr Henry Dundas, who now attached himself to Mr Pitt, supported on this occasion the motion of his friend, and asserted, that to comply with the wishes of the people, would be the happiest means of putting an end to their complaints. Mr Pitt's resolutions were lost by a majority of 293 to 149.

During the same session, the new administration brought forward a bill, admitting in express terms the exclusive rights and absolute supremacy of the parliament and courts of Ireland, in matters of legislation and judiciary; and for preventing any writs of error or appeal from the courts of that country to the courts of Great Britain. The bill passed with little opposition. It tended at the time to gratify the people of Ireland, though, by increasing the line of separation between the countries, it placed them in greater hazard of diffusion, an event which could not be intended by government, and which therefore seems to show, that this administration had formed no plan for establishing the connection between the two countries on a permanent basis. An act was passed during the same session for regulating the future commercial intercourse of Great Britain and America. This act, however, appears to have been merely intended as a temporary measure till a commercial treaty could take place.

Mr Dundas, during the present session, obtained leave to bring into parliament a bill for regulating the affairs of India. The chief features of his plan consisted of subjecting the presidencies of Madras and Bombay, to a controlling jurisdiction, to be granted to the government of Bengal. This last government he wished to establish in the person of a governor, who should be entitled to act when he thought fit, in opposition to the opinion of his council. Another object of his bill was to secure to the native proprietors their estates in perpetuity, on payment of a fixed tribute, and to extend these provisions to the nabob of Arcot and the rajah of Tanjore. Mr Dundas justified the necessity of this statute, in consequence of the improper conduct and tyranny of the servants of the East India Company, and especially of their principal servant Mr Haffings, whom he proposed to recall, and to send out to India Lord Cornwallis, as governor-general, in his stead. The scheme, however, proved abortive, but it led to other legislative efforts upon the same subject.

Though Mr Pitt had been unsuccessful in his proposal to reform the representation of the people in parliament; he did not fail immediately to bring forward a bill containing the project of an inferior species of reform, that of the fees, gratuities, and perquisites in the different departments of the public offices. The object of it was economy, for the purpose of enabling the nation to support the debt incurred in supporting the late war. The bill passed through the house of commons, but was rejected in the house of lords.

Towards the close of the session, a petition from the American loyalists was presented to the house of commons by Lord John Cavendish, in consequence of his majesty's command. It stated, that the petitioners, some of whom were men of the first character, fortune, and consequence, having adhered to Great Britain in the late contest with the colonies, had been attainted in N. America as traitors, and their effects confiscated by the legislatures of the different states. Many of the petitioners were widows and orphans, who had lost husbands and fathers, in consequence of their adherence to the British cause; others were military and civil officers, clergy or other professional men, who had lost their means of subsistence in the same manner. They prayed the house of commons to grant them such relief as might seem adequate to their circumstances. Accordingly, upon the motion of the chancellor of the exchequer, an act was passed appointing commissioners to inquire into the circumstances of such persons as were reduced to distress by the late difficulties in America.

On the 23d of June, a message from his majesty requested assistance towards making a separate establishment of the prince of Wales. Sixty thousand pounds only were demanded for this purpose; and it was stated by the minister of finance, Lord John Cavendish, that his majesty intended to allow the prince £50,000 a year out of the civil list, without requiring from the public any farther assistance than the above sum of £60,000, which would be requisite to defray the extraordinary expense attending a new establishment. This last sum was more readily granted, because rumours had gone abroad, which were alluded to by Mr Pitt in the house of commons, that an intention had existed on the part of the administration, particularly of Mr Fox, to give the prince a very splendid establishment at the public expense; but that this proposal was not acceptable to his majesty. Mr Fox said, that he undoubtedly considered the proposed establishment as too low; that if it had remained with him to have advised an establishment, he would most assuredly have proposed a sum more adequate to the object in view. The person, however, most proper to decide in the business, had been of an opinion very different, and it was his duty to submit.

Parliament was speedily thereafter prorogued. The nation was now in a state of tranquillity. Some anxiety, however, existed in the minds of men with regard to the public welfare. The load of public debt which had been incurred seemed excessive. Though commerce began to flow into new and extensive channels, the returns of trade necessarily required some time to exhibit themselves in the form of a flourishing revenue. In the interval, therefore, between the period at which the ministerial expenditure for the support of the war ceased, and that at which the first profits of foreign trade were received, a considerable shortcoming took place in the public revenue, and individuals experienced many difficulties. These, however, gradually passed away.

Two inventions were, by degrees, brought to perfection, which of themselves brought a profit to the public, all inventions most equivalent to the burdens to which it had submitted in consequence of the American war. These were the machine for spinning cotton, the invention of a man, originally of low rank (Arkwright), and the valuable kinds of pottery contrived by Mr Wedgwood. The first of these, by producing at a cheap rate the most beautiful cotton fabrics, put an end in a great measure to the use of silk, and gave to the British manufactures a kind of monopoly of many of the most useful articles of clothing; while the other not only drew to the nation immense sums from foreign countries, but from the bulky nature of the commodity, employed an immense tonnage of shipping in its exportation.

In the mean time, men had leisure to reflect upon the nature of the coalition of political parties, which had recently taken place. The tendency of that measure, and the possible evils which might result from it, did not at once present themselves to the minds of men, because it was not known to the public at large, that the sovereign had felt his own independence affected by the event. The general sentiment, however, was that of indignation against the political parties, who had so far forgotten all the principles which they had so long and loudly professed, as to be capable of uniting with each other, for the sake of power or private emolument. It was universally said that no honesty was to be found among political men, and that no profession of patriotism ought henceforth to be trusted. Thus a severe wound was inflicted upon the public morals of the nation, by the want of constancy which its most conspicuous characters had exhibited. The wound was the more deep, in consequence of the apparent strength of administration, which included in itself the men of greatest political influence in the kingdom, who were considered as likely long to retain the power which they now possessed.

In this state of affairs, parliament assembled on the 11th of November. In the speech from the throne, the necessity of providing for the security of the revenue, and of attending to the situation of the East India Company, were stated to both houses, as apologies for calling them together after so short a recess. After some days past in discussions relative to different parts of the revenue, Mr Secretary Fox moved for leave to bring in two bills relative to the affairs of the East India Company. By the first of these bills, it was proposed to take from the East India Company the whole administration of their territorial and commercial affairs, and to vest it in seven directors, named in the bill; viz. Earl Fitzwilliam, the right honourable Frederick Montague, Lord Vifcount Lewisham, the honourable George Augustus North, Sir Gilbert Elliot, Sir Henry Fletcher, and Robert Gregory, Esq. These directors, or commissioners, were to hold their office during four years, not to be removable by his majesty, without an address of either house of parliament. The directors were to be assisted by a board consisting of nine assistant directors, who were to be removable by five of the principal directors. The directors were to have full authority over all the company's servants and affairs, civil or military. The second bill, which accompanied the first in all its stages, was intended to regulate the administration of affairs in India. It forbade the exchange, acquisition, or invasion of any territory in India, by the general council, or any presidency there. It abolished all monopolies in India; prohibited the acceptance of presents, and made them recoverable by any person for his sole benefit. It secured an estate by inheritance to the native landholders, and provided against the alteration or increase of rents. It prohibited the molestation of princes subject to the company, and restrained the company's servants from collecting or farming their revenues, or having any pecuniary transactions with them. It prescribed a mode for adjusting the disputes between the nabob of Arcot, and the rajah of Tanjore, and between them and their British creditors. It disqualified the agents of the company, or of any protected Indian prince, from sitting in the British house of commons, and directed all offences against the act to be prosecuted in the courts of India, or in the court of king's bench.

The East India Company's affairs had hitherto been governed in terms of the charters of the company, by a court of proprietors, and a court of directors, elected by the proprietors. The rights of these courts, however, were thus to be absolutely taken away, and their whole powers, or the sovereignty of British India, was to be vested during four years certain in the hands of seven individuals, nominated by the present administration, through the medium of their parliamentary majority. It was undoubtedly a bold measure, openly to assail the privileges of such a body of men as the East India Company; but it was still more new and singular under the British constitution, in the form in which it had existed for more than a century, to vest a large portion of the executive power, including the command of armies, and an immense pecuniary patronage, in the hands of a few individuals, who were to hold their places for a fixed period, independent of the will of the crown. It was immediately said, that by taking possession in this manner of the patronage of Hindoostan, the present administration had found means to render themselves for a certain time avowedly independent of their sovereign, and that they would not fail to renew their own powers at the end of that period. They were represented as not scrupulous in the measures adopted by them, to accomplish this object of their ambition, seeing they treated with contempt, what has always been accounted extremely sacred in England, the chartered privileges of an incorporation.

It is to be observed, however, that the present administration had in some degree been led by circumstances, which previously occurred, and which did not originate with them, to adopt some decisive measures for reducing India under better management than that in which it had been placed under the care of the East India Company. Of these it will not be improper here to take a short review.

The circumstance of a great and wealthy empire, having been vanquished by a company of merchants was a thing so new in the history of the world, that it could not fail to be attended with a variety of inconveniences. The European nations have a near resemblance to each other in laws, manners, arts, and religion. The mutual jealousy, which for some centuries they had been accustomed to entertain of each other, had prevented any of them from making great conquests. When any power happened to acquire an addition of territory, this addition was never very great; and the laws of neighbouring states being nearly alike, the conquered province scarcely experienced any misfortune from a change of masters. Hence the evils attending upon great conquests, had ceased to be known among the nations of Europe. The conquerors and the conquered, being in all cases men of similar characters and talents, easily mingled with each other. The nobles of Alsace were as well received at the court of France, as those belonging to the ancient dominions of that crown; and the natives of the Netherlands regarded with much indifference their transition from the dominion of Spain, to that of Austria and of France. But when the British made conquests in Hindoostan, all the evils occurring... red which naturally attend the loss of national independence, and that most wretched of all states of human affairs, in which a race of strangers enjoys permanent dominion, while the natives of a country are subjected to hopeless depression and slavery. The British invaders of India undoubtedly possessed, or speedily acquired, the same rapacity with other conquerors; and as they were the servants of a company of merchants, whose only principle of exertion is profit, it is probable that under them avarice and extortion assumed more vexatious forms, because accompanied with greater affluency and a more persevering temper than could be exhibited by the former conquerors of that country, who issued from the deserts of Tartary and Arabia. The people of Great Britain, accustomed at home to the mildest of all governments, and to the most equitable administration of justice that the world ever saw, heard with horror of the crimes, the robberies, the perfidies, and the massacres which their countrymen had committed, and by which their national name and character had been rendered odious in the east. The British government being no party to these crimes, wished to see them remedied, and very naturally supposed, that the best remedy would consist in taking India under its own immediate management. Some public-spirited men dreaded the accession of influence which the crown would thus necessarily acquire. Men of humanity, however, were willing to encounter considerable hazard, for the sake of altering the unjustifiable mode of management, which was admitted to exist in the east.

Early in the year 1781, two committees were appointed by the house of commons, to inquire into the mal-administration of the East India Company's affairs both at home and abroad. All parties in the house appear to have concurred in these measures. The first, which was styled a select committee, was directed to take into consideration the state of the administration of justice, in the provinces of Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa, and how the British possessions in the East Indies might be held and governed with the greatest advantage to this country, and happiness to the native inhabitants. The business of this committee was conducted by some of the most distinguished members of opposition. The second was a secret committee, under the management of persons in the confidence of administration. It was directed to inquire into the causes of the war in the Carnatic, and the condition of the British possessions in those parts.

On the 9th of April 1782, Mr Henry Dundas, then lord advocate of Scotland, and chairman of the secret committee, moved that the reports of that committee should be referred to a committee of the whole house. On this occasion, Mr Dundas, in a speech which lasted nearly three hours, enumerated the causes of the calamities of the east, particularly the departure of the company's presidencies from the line of policy prescribed to them, of avoiding military operations with a view to conquest; the corrupt interference of their servants in the domestic and national quarrels of the country powers; their breaches of faith and disregard of treaties; their peculation and scandalous oppression of the natives; together with the criminal relaxation which prevailed on the part of the directors at home in the exercise of their controlling power over their servants, and their ready connivance at the grossest misconduct. Instances of all these were given by Mr Dundas, and he inferred the necessity of legislative intervention for the purpose of punishing delinquents, and to take the power out of those hands in which it had been so grossly abused.

At the same time, Mr Dundas brought forward a variety of other resolutions, which were adopted by the house, and which censured in strong terms the late governor of Madras, Sir Thomas Rumbold, and Mr Hastings, then governor-general of Bengal. Among various other charges, it was stated in the resolutions, that Sir Thomas Rumbold had remitted to Europe, between the 8th of February 1778 (the day of his arrival at Madras), and the beginning of August in the same year, the sum of £41,000. and during the two subsequent years, a farther sum of £119,000., the whole amounting to £160,000., although his salary did not exceed £13,335.l. per annum, and he had no other fair means of acquiring wealth. He was charged with having abolished the committees, instituted to superintend the payment of the revenue due by the zemindars, or natives holding lands under the company, and with having compelled those zemindars to travel many hundred miles, to negotiate separately with himself, the terms on which they were to be allowed to hold their estates. He was charged with having suffered his private secretary to receive a bribe of no less than £20,000.; with having concealed other peculations of the company's servants; with having given a lease of lands to the nabob of Arcot, in direct disobedience to the company's orders; and with having violated the most solemn treaties, entered into with the nizam of the Decan. In consequence of these, and other accusations contained in the resolutions moved by Mr Dundas, leave was given to bring in a bill of pains and penalties against Sir Thomas Rumbold, and two of his associates, Peter Perry and John Whitehill, for breaches of public trust and high crimes and misdemeanours; at the same time, an act was passed, restraining those persons from leaving the kingdom, obliging a discovery of their property, and preventing its alienation. Sir Thomas Rumbold was heard by council at great length in his defence, so that nothing could be done during the short period that remained of the session 1782. The unsettled state of public affairs prevented much attention from being given to the subject, till the middle of the session 1783. The variety of accusations rendered a very minute defence necessary, to which the members gradually became somewhat remiss in giving attention. At last, on the 1st of July, a motion was made, and carried, for adjourning the further consideration of the bill till the 1st of October, by which means the whole proceeding fell to the ground. Sir Thomas Rumbold appears to have been willing to accept of indemnity without acquittal, and Mr Dundas never afterwards thought fit to revive the discussion.

In other resolutions brought forward on the 15th of April 1782, Mr Dundas stated a variety of accusations against Warren Hastings, Esq. and Mr Hornsby, and prevailed with the house to adopt a resolution, declaring it to be the duty of the directors of the East India Company to recall the governor-general, and Mr Hornsby the president, from their respective offices. Accordingly, the court of directors issued orders for this purpose; but these were appealed from, to a court of proprietors, who, on the 31st of October 1782, prohibited the court of directors from complying with the resolution of the house of commons: the result was, that Mr Hastings retained his office, and Mr Dundas, in the following session of parliament, brought forward the bill which we have already mentioned, but which was not enacted into a law.

At the same time that Mr Dundas, as chairman of the ministerial or secret committee, brought forward the resolutions already mentioned, the select committee, which chiefly consisted of members of opposition, presented their report; and on the 18th of April 1782, General Smith, their chairman, proposed various resolutions, in some of which Mr Hastings was criminated along with Sir Elijah Impey, chief justice of the supreme court of Bengal. It is understood that by means of investigations, which they carried on in this last committee, the leading members of opposition, particularly Mr Fox and Mr Burke, qualified themselves for directing at a future period the attention of the legislature, and of the public, to the state of Indian affairs.

Mr Fox made use of his knowledge to bring forward the two important bills already mentioned, which proposed to vest the management of the whole affairs in India, for behoof of the proprietors or stockholders, in seven commissioners to be named by parliament. To justify this strong measure, it was alleged, that, by the mismanagement of the courts of directors and proprietors, the affairs of the company had been brought into a state of extreme embarrassment. But the argument chiefly rested upon consisted of the enormous abuses committed under the company's government in India, which rendered it absolutely necessary to vest the administration in other hands. These abuses were arranged under three heads, as they affected, 1st, The independent powers of India; 2dly, The states in alliance with us; and 3dly, Our own territorial possessions.

Under the first class were ranged the extravagant projects and expensive wars entered into by the company to extend their dominions; their violations of treaty; the sale of their assistance in support of the ambition, rapacity, and cruelty of others; and the betraying in his turn every prince, without exception, with whom they had formed any connexion in India. The second class of abuses comprehended the corrupt and ruinous interference of the company in the internal government of the princes dependent on them; the unjust exaction of exorbitant aids and tribute; the enormous peculations of the company's civil servants, and the rapacity of the military.

With respect to the management of the countries under the immediate dominion of the company, it was asserted by Mr Fox, and the supporters of administration, that the general system of their conduct in India was directed to a single end, the transmission of wealth from that country to this. With this view, at one time, monopolies had been established, not only of every article of trade, but even of the necessaries of life. At another period the privilege of pre-emption was secured to the company, and these were followed by a variety of no less ruinous arbitrary preferences. By this oppressive conduct the merchants and bankers of India, many of whom in extent of trade and credit, were scarcely equalled by those of the first class in Europe, being disabled from all undertakings of magnitude, fell gradually into decay, whilst the native cultivators and manufacturers were obliged to accept of a bare sufficiency for their maintenance, measured out to them by the judgment of those who were to profit by their labour. But this was not the worst; for, in the progress of these destructive measures, the oppressions and cruelties used by those to whom the execution of them was committed went far beyond the extent of the original evil. The servants of the company adopting, as might naturally be expected, the principles of their employers; extended the practice of them to their own private purposes; and, to complete the mischief, they found themselves under the necessity of supporting the injuries done to the natives for their selfish ends, by new injuries done in favour of those before whom they were to account.

The case of the zemindars, and of the renters under them, was, if possible, still more deplorable. At the time we obtained the dewanee, or stewardship, from the Mogul, the provinces of Bengal and Bihar had been laid waste by a famine, that had carried off upwards of one-third of their inhabitants. The first thing done for their relief was to exact from the remaining part of the inhabitants the same tribute that had before been paid by the whole. The country daily declining, and the distresses occasioned by this rascacious conduct threatening the loss of the object for the sake of which it had been adopted, the company's government in India had proceeded to perhaps one of the most arbitrary, the most unjust, and most cruel acts of power recorded in history. They had set up to public auction the whole landed interest of Bengal, without the least regard to the rights of private property, or even a preference being given to the ancient possessors. The zemindars, most of them persons of ancient families and respectable fortunes, were under the necessity either of bidding against every temporary adventurer and desperate schemer, or of seeing their estates transferred or delivered up to the management of strangers. The lowest and most knavish jobbers entered into their patrimonial lands; and the banyan or black steward of the governor-general, in particular, was found after this auction to be in possession of farms amounting to the annual value of upwards of 130,000l.

These sufferings of the natives under our dominion in India were greatly aggravated by their being almost wholly excluded from any share in the expenditures of the company's government. All the principal collections of the revenue, all the honourable and lucrative situations in the army, all the supplies and contracts of every kind, were solely in the hands of the English. So that the natives, with very few exceptions, were only employed as the servants or agents of Europeans, in subordinate stations in the army, and in the inferior department of collection, where it was impossible to proceed a step without their assistance.

It was further urged, that the present government of India was not in its nature capable of reform. Nothing could be expected from the court of proprietors or stockholders, because the members, as individuals, derived more profit from giving support to Indian delinquents, than they could ever hope to receive from the the fair dividends of the company. The court of directors, being a representative body, naturally partook of the imperfections of its constituents. The influence of delinquent servants in India equally domineered there, and from the same causes, as in the court of proprietors. The interest that a director possessed from his qualification in the company's profits did not exceed £60. a-year; but the support he could thereby lend to an obnoxious servant abroad might be turned to much better account, by being repaid with a share of the boundless plunder of the east. It was stated, that the son of a person who had been for some time the chairman of that court, before he was in Bengal two months, sold the grant of a single contract for £40,000.

Upon these and other topics, Mr Fox was supported by the highest efforts of the splendid eloquence of Mr Burke. This last gentleman pointed out a few of the many lines of difference which were to be found between the vices of the company's government and those of the conquerors who preceded us in India. The several irruptions of Arabs, Tartars, and Persians, had been, for the greater part, wasteful in the extreme: our entrance into the dominion had been with small comparative effusion of blood, and was less effected by open force than by various frauds and delusions. But the difference in favour of the first conquerors was this; the Asiatic conquerors had soon abated of their ferocity, because they made the conquered country their own. Fathers there deposited the hopes of their posterity, and children there beheld the monuments of their fathers. Poverty, sterility, and desolation, were not a recreating prospect to the eye of man, and few there were that could bear to grow old among the curses of a whole people. If their passion or their avarice drove the Tartar lords to acts of rapacity or tyranny, there had been time enough in the short life of man to repair the defolations of war by the arts of magnificence and peace. But under the English government all this order was reverenced. Our conquest there, after 20 years, was as cruel as it had been the first day. The natives scarcely knew what it was to see the gray head of an Englishman. Young men (boys almost) governed there, without society and without sympathy with the natives. They had no more social habits with the people than if they still resided in England, nor indeed any species of intercourse; but that which was necessary to the making a sudden fortune with a view to a remote settlement. Animated with all the avarice of age, and all the impetuosity of youth, they rolled in one after another, wave after wave; and there was nothing before the eyes of the natives but an endless hopeless prospect of new flights of birds of prey and passage, with appetites continually renewing for a food that was continually wasting. Every rupee of profit made by an Englishman, was lost for ever to India. With us were no retributory superstitions, by which a foundation of charity compensated for ages to the poor, for the rapine and injustice of a day. With us no pride erected stately monuments, which repaired the mischiefs pride had produced, and adorned a country out of its own spoils. England had erected no churches, no hospitals, no palaces, no schools; England had built no bridges, made no high roads, cut no navigations, dug no reservoirs. Every other conqueror of every other description had left some monument, either of state or of beneficence, behind him. Were we to be driven out of India this day, nothing would remain to tell, that it had been possessed, during the glorious period of our dominion, by anything better than the ouran-oungar or the tyger.

In opposition to all this, Mr William Pitt contended, that although India undoubtedly wanted reform, the alteration to be adopted ought to be constitutional, and not such as in its principle endangered the safety of every chartered incorporation in the kingdom. The India company's charter was not the result of the mad prodigality of a Plantagenet, a Tudor, or a Stuart, but a fair purchase deliberately made from parliament, which could not be violated without a gross disfavour to public faith. He asserted, that by veiling the whole patronage of India in commissioners nominally appointed by parliament, but actually selected by administration, the influence of the crown would be augmented to a degree that would enable it, like an irresistible torrent, utterly to overpower and sweep away the remaining liberties of our country. On the other hand, Mr Dundas said, he did not object to the measure under consideration because it increased the influence of the crown, but because it did what was much worse, it placed a new and unexampled influence in the hands of the minister and his party for five years, which would be independent both of the crown and of parliament. A fourth estate was about to be created in the realm of the most alarming nature, which in its progress might overturn the crown and subvert the British constitution.

On this occasion the bills were attacked not merely by those persons who might be supposed to aspire to oppose by supplant ministers in their offices, but also by several many independent country gentlemen of independent characters and high personal reputation for integrity. They said they had once regarded Mr Fox with the fondest admiration. They reminded him of his conduct when a leader of opposition, the perseverance, the animation, and the ardour of his efforts, which rendered it impossible to hear him without conviction, or to doubt the singleness of his zeal, and the sincerity of his reprobation. They declared they had expected from him the establishment of our liberties upon the most permanent basis; but that they must ever regard the connexion he had formed with Lord North, against whom his efforts had been so well and so successfully directed, as an instance of political defection and apostasy that would admit of no defence; they had augured everything unhappy and tremendous from that moment, and the measure of that day proved their apprehensions to have been well founded; it was big with corruption and misfortune; in consequence of it the crown would be no longer worth wearing, and it was impossible that the man who had brought it forward could ever hereafter be trusted as the minister of this country.

The ordinary members of opposition also attacked Mr Fox's motives on this occasion in very pointed terms. It appeared, they said, that nothing could satisfy his inordinate ambition short of a perpetual dictatorship. They professed to perceive in him many respectable qualities; but they could by no means consent to see him exalted upon the ruins of the constitu- tion. "He would be crowned. How that might change his nature, there's the question." This idea was placed in a great variety of lights, and illustrated by comparisons borrowed from Caesar, from Cromwell, and from Catiline. It was said, that he was prepared to sacrifice the king, the parliament, and the people, at the shrine of a party; and that he desired to elevate his present connexions to a situation in which no political convulsions, and no shifting of power, might be able to destroy their importance and put an end to their ascendancy.

The bills were supported by various speakers, among whom were the two secretaries of state, Mr Burke, Mr Sheridan, Mr Erskine, Mr Lee, Mr Adam, Sir Grey Couper, Mr Anstruther, Mr Courteney, Mr Rigby, Lord Maitland, and Sir Henry Fletcher. They were opposed by Mr William Pitt, Mr Thomas Pitt, Mr Jenkinson, Mr Powis, Mr Dundas, Mr Macdonald, Sir James Lowther, Mr Duncombe, Mr Martin, the marquis of Graham, Mr Arden, Mr William Grenville, Mr Beaufort, Mr Wilberforce, Lord Mulgrave, and Mr Wilkes. During the progress of the bills the court of directors of the East India Company were heard against them by counsel; and the mayor and common council of the city of London presented a petition, praying they might not pass into laws. The first bill, however, was carried, first by a majority of 229 to 120, and afterwards on the 8th of December by a division of 208 to 102. On the 9th of December it was presented at the bar of the house of lords by Mr Fox, attended by a great number of members. On the first reading of the bill in the house of lords on the 11th of December, Earl Temple, Lord Thurlow, and the duke of Richmond, expressed their abhorrence of the measure in the most unqualified terms, but without attempting to call a vote of the house. Lord Thurlow, at the same time, pronounced an ample panegyric upon the character and services of Mr Hastings, who, according to his lordship, had established in Bengal a government of such order and energy, that he did not believe it would be in the power of the folly and ignorance of the most favourite clerks Mr Fox's directors could send out, to throw Bengal into confusion in the term that was assigned for the duration of his bill.

One of the peculiar advantages attending the British constitution, is the facility with which both prince and people receive political instruction, and are put upon their guard against any invasion of their rights. The parliamentary debates on this occasion being diffused through the nation in the usual way, by periodical publications, excited great interest, and probably produced much alarm in the mind of the sovereign. He had reluctantly given way to the strength of the coalition, and conferred upon its leaders the first offices of the state. He now saw it alleged, with much plausibility, that this combination of ambitious men, not satisfied with the ordinary influence attending their situation, were about to fortify themselves in the possession of power in such a way as might gradually enable them to become independent both of him and his people. The moment seemed therefore to have arrived at which temporizing measures must prove ineffectual, and a stand be made for the support of the royal prerogative. Such at least appear to have been the feelings under which his majesty acted upon this occasion. On the 11th of December he had a conference with Earl Temple, in which he confessed himself completely convinced of the correctness of the views of opposition. It was now late, however, for his majesty to oppose a measure after it had been brought forward by the ministers of the crown, and carried through the house of commons apparently under the sanction of the royal authority. A resolution was, nevertheless, adopted, to endeavour to prevent its farther progress by means of the house of lords, many of the members of which were in habits of personal intimacy with the sovereign, bound, by offices which they held, to attend his person, and might be supposed ready to gratify his wishes, could a sufficient pledge be given, that he had taken a decided part against his own ministers. What personal interviews passed between him and these noblemen is not known; but a card was circulated, underflooded to be sent by Earl Temple, in consequence of written authority from his bill, majesty, in which it was stated, that "his majesty allowed Earl Temple to say, that whoever voted for the India bill was not only not his friend, but would be considered by him as his enemy. And if these words were not strong enough, Earl Temple might use whatever words he might deem stronger or more to the purpose."

The consequence of this interposition was, that, on the 16th of December, upon a question of adjournment in the house of lords, the ministers were left in a minority of 79 to 87. On the same day Mr Baker brought forward, in the house of commons, a motion to declare, that, to report any opinion of his majesty, upon proceedings depending in parliament, with a view to influence the votes of the members, is a high crime and misdemeanor, and a breach of the fundamental privileges of parliament. The motion was seconded by Lord Maitland, and supported by references to the journals, and by this principle, that advice ought only to be given to the king by his ministers, who are responsible for all the measures of government. Mr William Pitt opposed the motion, as proceeding upon unauthenticated rumours; and asserted that the precedents alluded to in the journals, which had been selected from the glorious times of King Charles I., were not applicable to the present case. Mr Pitt concluded with reproaching ministers for basely retaining their offices after it appeared, from their own statement, that they had lost the confidence of the prince. The motion, however, was carried by 153 against 80. As it was feared that a dissolution of parliament would instantly take place, the house resolved, upon the motion of the honourable Thomas Erskine, That they would consider any person as an enemy to his country, who should advise his majesty, in any manner, to interrupt their discharging the important duty of providing a remedy for the abuses which prevailed in the East Indies. They also resolved to form themselves into a committee on the state of the nation on Monday the 22d. In the meantime, on Wednesday the 17th of December, Mr Fox's India bill was rejected in the house of lords, on a division of 95 to 76; and, at 12 o'clock on the night of the 18th, a message was delivered to the secretaries of state, requiring them to transmit to his majesty the Change of seals of their offices, by the under secretaries, as a personal A new administration was immediately formed, in which Mr William Pitt was appointed first lord of the treasury and chancellor of the exchequer. The marquis of Caernarvon, and Mr Townshend, who had been created Lord Sidney, were made secretaries of state; Lord Thurlow became lord-high-chancellor; the privy-seal was transferred to the duke of Rutland; Earl Gower became president of the council; the duke of Richmond was made master of the ordnance, and Lord Howe first lord of the admiralty; Mr Grenville and Lord Mulgrave were appointed joint-paymasters of the forces, and Mr Henry Dundas, treasurer of the navy. The office of lord advocate of Scotland, which this gentleman had formerly held, was now transferred from the honourable Henry Erskine to Mr Hay Campbell.

A spectacle was now about to be exhibited, which had long been unknown in Britain, that of an administration appointed by the crown, in direct opposition to the house of commons. This, however, was no longer that house of commons which had subduced the royal prerogative, and contended with success against our ablest and most ambitious monarchs. The late coalition had produced throughout the nation a general distrust of the character of those who formed the majority of its members; and it was soon found, that a representative body possesses little power or influence, and may safely be disregarded, when it ceases to render itself the organ of the sentiments of the public. It was expected that an immediate dissolution of parliament would take place; but the change of the highest officers of the crown having been hastily made, it is probable that the new ministry dreaded entering instantly upon the business of an election against the powerful parties coalesced in opposition to them; perhaps also they might wish to observe the effect of the late measures upon the public mind, and act as circumstances should direct. The majority, however, of the house of commons, feared a dissolution; and, on Monday the 22d of December, voted an address to the king, stating the inconveniences to the public credit and the affairs of India, which would attend a prorogation or dissolution of parliament. His majesty returned an answer on the 24th, acquiescing, in general terms, in the sentiments contained in the address, and assuring the house, that after a short adjournment, their meeting would not be interrupted by any prorogation or dissolution. This answer was regarded as ambiguous; and a dissolution was expected to take place immediately after the usual adjournment at Christmas.

When the house met on the 12th of January, Mr Fox attempted to introduce, previous to any other business, the discussion of certain resolutions, which had been prepared by the opposition; while the new ministers endeavoured to be heard first, by means of a stratagem, which consisted of a declaration of Mr Pitt, that he had a message to deliver from the king. After some tumult, Mr Fox was allowed to proceed. He called upon Mr Pitt to give the house satisfactory assurances that no dissolution would take place; but this last gentleman having declined to comply with this requisition, Mr Fox moved, that the house should resolve itself into a committee on the state of the nation. The motion was carried, on a division of 232 to 193. Various resolutions were then carried: 1. That to the issue public money after a prorogation or dissolution of house of parliament, unless an act shall have previously passed, common appropriating the supplies to specific services, will be a breach of high crime and misdemeanor; a breach of public ministration, derogatory to the privileges of parliament and to the constitution of the country. Accounts of money already issued were ordered, and the farther issuing of any money was prohibited till three days after this account should be presented. It was farther resolved, on the motion of the earl of Surrey, that, in the present state of his majesty's dominions, an administration was necessary that should have the confidence of that house and the public, and that the recent appointments did not engage the confidence of the house. It was lastly resolved, on the motion of Mr Fox, that the second reading of the mutiny bill should be deferred to the 23d of February.

Warm debates took place upon these resolutions, in which the most pointed personalities were cast out the resolutions and retorted from both sides of the house. The coalition was branded, as a corrupt confederacy of two desperate factions to seize upon the government of the country; and the India bill was represented as having been an experiment made by the late secretary of state, with a view, if not to place the crown on his own head, at least to raise himself to a degree of power superior to that of the sovereign. On the other hand, the party composing the new administration was described as a coalition, not indeed of parties, but of the shreds and remnants, of the dregs and outcasts of parties; as a body collected for the purpose of fighting the battles of secret and unconstitutional influence, of trampling on the power and dignity of the house of commons, of establishing a government of cabal, intrigue, and favoritism, and of destroying the very principles of laudable ambition and honourable service in the state.

On the 14th of January, Mr Pitt obtained leave Mr Pitt's to bring in a bill for the better government and regulation of the affairs of the East India Company. By this bill, commissioners were appointed by his majesty, authorized to superintend and control all operations of the courts of directors and proprietors of the East India Company, relative to the civil and military government or revenues of the territories and possessions of the company. This board of control was to have access to all papers belonging to the company; and the court of directors was on no pretence to send out orders to India, without the previous approbation of the board, which was also authorized to alter and amend the orders of the directors. His majesty was authorized to name the commanders in chief in India, and to remove any governor, general, or member of the councils, of any British settlement in India; and all nominations by the court of directors to these offices, were declared to be subject to the approbation of his majesty; nor was the court of proprietors allowed, for the future, to revoke any proceeding of the court of directors which had been approved of by his majesty. It was chiefly objected to this bill, that it disfranchised the East India Company or violated their charter no less than Mr Fox's bill. A meeting of the court of proprietors, however, had passed a vote in favour of the regulations contained in it; but at the second reading of the bill, on the 22nd of January, the bill was negatived upon a division of 222 against 214.

The discussion of this bill did not prevent the house of commons, in the meantime, from endeavouring to shake the determination of the court, and to intimidate the new administration. A resolution was moved by Lord Charles Spencer, and carried by a majority of 205 against 184, which declared, in pointed terms, the disapprobation of the house, of the appointment and continuance in office of the present ministers, which they considered as unconstitutional. On various occasions, Mr Pitt was called upon to explain upon what principle he ventured to remain in office after the house of commons had declared him unworthy of their confidence. He answered, that though novel and extraordinary, his conduct was by no means unconstitutional: That the immediate appointment or removal of a minister did not rest with that house. That he neither could nor ought to remain long in such a situation, he was ready to confess; but he was bound to use his own discretion to prevent the consequences that might attend an instant resignation, which might leave the country without an executive government.

In the meantime, the public at large began to be greatly interested in the dispute which had occurred between the king and the house of commons. The common council of London voted an address of thanks to his majesty for the dismissal of his late ministers; expressed their approbation of the conduct of the house of lords; and declared their resolution always to support the constitutional exercise of prerogative. This address was almost immediately followed by similar addresses from the merchants and trades of the city of London, and from the city of Norwich. The contagion gradually extended itself from one part of the kingdom to another; addresses poured in from every side, and filled every day's gazette; coming from corporations, from cities, from manufacturing towns, and from counties. Every address served to inspire perseverance and energy into the successful party, and to hasten and render irresistible the event of this extraordinary contest. The coalition made some attempts in the county of Middlesex, in Westminster, and in the great county of York, to turn the tide of addresses in their own favour; but in these instances, if they avoided a defeat, they gained no victory.

In the meanwhile, as if the recent coalition of parties deserved to be considered rather as an example worthy of imitation than as an error to be avoided, a number of independent members of the house of commons attempted to heal the whole of the present breaches, by proposing a new coalition of parties, and the formation of an administration upon a still broader basis than formerly. On the 26th of January, nearly 70 members of the house of commons met at the St Albans tavern, and signed an address, to be presented by a committee of their body, to the duke of Portland and Mr Pitt, requesting them to communicate with each other, on the arduous state of public affairs, and trusting, that by a liberal intercourse, every impediment might be removed to a cordial cooperation of men of respectable characters, acting on the same principles. In answer to this address, both parties expressed themselves desirous to comply with the wishes of so respectable a meeting. But the duke of Portland declined any interview with Mr Pitt, for the purpose of union, while that gentleman should continue prime minister in defiance of the resolutions of the house of commons. On the other hand, Mr Pitt declined resigning as a preliminary to negociation.

To co-operate with the St Albans meeting, one of its members moved, and carried unanimously in the house of commons, a resolution, that the present critical state of public affairs required an efficient, extended, and united administration, entitled to the confidence of the people. A second resolution was carried on a division of 223 against 204, that the continuance of the present ministers in office was an obstacle to forming an efficient, extended, and united administration. On the following day these resolutions were ordered, by a majority of 24, to be laid before his majesty. The meeting at the St Albans tavern next came to a resolution, which was read to the house of commons, in which they declared, that an administration formed on the total exclusion of the members of the last or present administration would be inadequate to the exigencies of public affairs. Mr Fox declared his wishes for an union, but insisted on the resignation of the chancellor of the exchequer in compliance with the resolutions of the house of commons, as an indispensable preliminary step. Mr Pitt, on the contrary, adhered to his office, and declared, that the house might address the crown for his dismissal; but till, in consequence of such a measure, the king should think proper to remove him from his situation, he held it neither illegal nor unconstitutional to retain it, and would not recede from his former determination. He at the same time suggested, that there might be persons on the opposite side of the house with whom he could not act. Lord North understanding himself to be alluded to, declared his readiness to relinquish his pretensions to an official situation, if they should be deemed an obstacle to an union. This self-denying declaration was received with great applause; and Mr Marsham, Mr Powis, and other members of the St Albans association, in vain called upon Mr Pitt to yield to the pressing exigencies of his country. These gentlemen still continued their efforts; and to remove the difficulty arising from Mr Pitt's refusal to resign in compliance with the resolutions and addresses of the house of commons, or to have the honour of the house upon that subject, they procured the royal interference for the purpose of requesting, that a negociation should be set on foot between the duke of Portland and Mr Pitt. A message was accordingly sent by Mr Pitt, acquainting the duke, that he was commanded to signify to him his majesty's earnest desire that his grace should have a personal conference with Mr Pitt for the purpose of forming a new administration, on a wide basis and on fair and equal terms. The duke requested an explanation of the message with regard to the words equal terms, but Mr Pitt declined any preliminary discussion. The duke of Portland likewise proposed that he should be permitted to understand that the message implied a virtual resignation by Mr Pitt, or that he himself should receive his majesty's commands personally relative to the conference. Both of these were were refused, and here terminated the efforts of the St Albans's association.

On the 18th of February the chancellor of the exchequer was required in his place in the house of commons, to say, previous to the consideration of the question of supply to the ordnance department, whether any communication was to be expected relative to the resolutions of the house which had recently been laid before the king. He replied that his majesty, after considering all the circumstances of the country, had not thought fit to dismiss his ministers, and that his ministers had not resigned. This produced a warm debate, in which it was observed by Mr Fox, that it was the first instance since the revolution, of a direct denial on the part of the crown, to comply with the wishes of the house of commons, and he threw out a hint that it might be necessary for the house to protest its own authority by refusing to vote the supplies. To allow his majesty's ministers time, however, to consider well their situation, he proposed to defer the report of the ordnance estimate only for two days. The refusal of the supplies was treated by the friends of the new administration as a threat which the utmost madness of faction would not seriously attempt to execute, and which could never be justified by his majesty's refusal to dismiss ministers who had been condemned without a trial. On a division, there appeared for postponing the supplies 208; against it 196. On the 20th of February a new address to the throne for the removal of the ministers was carried by a majority of 21. On the 27th, his majesty's answer was reported by the speaker, in which it was stated that no charge or complaint was suggested against the ministers, nor was any one of them specifically objected to; and, on the other hand, that numbers of his subjects had expressed to his majesty the utmost satisfaction on the change of his councils. This answer was abundantly artful, as it tended to divide the people at large from the house of commons; and, at the same time, to perplex the coalition, who could not accuse the prime minister of any political crime, as he was a young man who had never enjoyed the chief direction of any important affair. A second address to the throne was moved in the house of commons on the 1st of March, and agreed to by a majority of 12, remonstrating against the answer to the former address. His majesty replied in civil terms, but persevered in his resolution to retain his ministers. The opposition now made their last effort. Mr Fox declared that he would not propose what is called an address to the throne, because he wished for no answer; but a humble representation, to which it is not customary to make an answer. This representation consisted of a long remonstrance against what was termed the unconstitutional appointment of an administration in opposition to the wishes of the house of commons. It concluded by stating that the house had done its duty by pointing out the evil, and that the blame and responsibility must henceforth lie wholly upon those who had presumed to advise his majesty to act in contradiction to the uniform maxims which had hitherto governed his own conduct, as well as that of every other prince of his illustrious house. The motion for this representation was carried by a majority of only one vote, that is, by a division of 191 to 190. Here the coalition appear to have felt themselves defeated, and to have finally yielded to their destiny, as they suffered the mutiny bill, which had been their last security against a premature dissolution, to pass in the usual terms.

While these contests had been going on in the house of commons, the house of lords was little attended to, the house of lords and its strength seems to have been as it were exhausted by the extraordinary effort made by it in rejecting Mr Fox's India bill. As its silence during so critical a time was neither calculated to support its own dignity, nor the interest of the minister, an effort was made on the 14th of February to bring it into action. The earl of Effingham moved a resolution expressive of the firm reliance of the house in his majesty's wisdom in the exercise of the prerogative of appointing his own ministers. This, which was meant as a counter resolution to the votes of the commons, passed by a considerable majority after a short debate; and here the house of lords, conscious of the secondary place in point of importance which they held, if not in the constitution, at least in the estimation of the public, appear to have relapsed into their former taciturnity.

On the 25th of March, parliament was dissolved. In the elections which immediately took place, the new administration were extremely successful. The East India Company and their servants were uncommonly zealous; and the dissenters, a powerful body in England, of a conscientious character and great activity, having regarded with indignation the late coalition as the result of a total disregard of all principle, cast their whole weight into the same scale with the influence of the crown. Upwards of 160 members of the late house of commons lost their seats; and of these, almost the whole number were the friends of the late administration. Thus the defeat of what was looked upon as a most powerful and dangerous combination was completely accomplished, and its leaders were rendered of little importance in the legislature of the empire.

Thus terminated the strength of the celebrated coalition, the fate and effects of which ought never to be forgotten. That fatal measure may be said to have absolutely ruined the fortunes of the honourable Charles Fox, undoubtedly one of the most accomplished statesmen that the British nation ever produced. From that period, he was generally regarded as unfit to be trusted with power; his eloquence ceased to persuade, and his counsels, even when full of wisdom, were regarded with distrust, because his odious coalition with Lord North constantly rose up in remembrance against him, and suggested the strongest suspicions of his integrity, a circumstance which has probably proved on some occasions not less unfortunate to his country than to himself. The same coalition undoubtedly had a tendency to diminish the attachment of the nation to the house of commons, and its confidence in that branch of the constitution. It appeared that a majority of that house might be nothing more than a combination of factious men, aspiring to personal aggrandizement or emolument, and that in certain circumstances it might be necessary for the people at large to arrange themselves behind the throne, to obtain protection against what is undoubtedly one of the worst and most oppressive of all governments, that of a corrupted aristocracy.

On the 18th of May, parliament assembled, and in New parliament. the speech from the throne, his majesty assured both houses of his satisfaction in meeting them, after recurring in so important a moment to the sense of his people, and of his reliance that they were animated by the same sentiments of loyalty and attachment to the constitution, which had been so fully manifested throughout the kingdom: He directed their attention towards the affairs of the East India Company; but warned them against adopting any measures which might affect the constitution at home; and concluded with expressing his inclination to maintain in their just balance the privileges and rights of every branch in the legislature.

The affairs of the East India Company were speedily brought before parliament. On the 24th of June, a bill was introduced by the chancellor of the exchequer, to allow the company to divide four per cent. on their capital for the half year concluding at midsummer 1784. The necessity of the case was urged to justify this bill to support the credit of the company; and it was alleged, that notwithstanding their present difficulties, which were admitted to be great, there existed a sufficient probability that their affairs upon the whole might warrant such a dividend. The bill passed through both houses, and received the royal assent.

On the 2d of July, Mr Pitt brought forward another bill, which had for its object to allow the company a respite of duties due to the exchequer, to enable them to accept of bills beyond the amount prescribed by former statutes, and to establish the regularity of their future dividends. This act gave rise to various debates, particularly, in consequence of a question put by Mr Philip Francis, how far the honour of parliament would be pledged by this act to enable the East India Company to make payment of the bills accepted by them, in case the funds of the company should prove deficient. Mr Eden also endeavoured to expose the bill, by contrasting the two distinct propositions contained in it; the one for resisting the duties due by the company, and the other for allowing the company to divide eight per cent. He alleged that these propositions could only be justified by being argued separately, and by contending in support of the first, that the company was so poor, that it required every possible assistance, and in support of the other that their affairs were so flourishing that they could well afford to make an enormous dividend. On the contrary, Mr Pitt contended that the company had suffered like the rest of the British empire by the late war, and therefore wanted a temporary relief; but that they were still in the proper sense of the word actually solvent; that the best hope existed of their future prosperity, which rendered the regular payment of their dividends a rational measure, especially as government had just received intelligence of peace being concluded in the East with Tippoo the son of Hyder Ally. This act also passed into a law; and Mr Pitt, still farther to support the East India Company, brought forward a bill to diminish the duty upon tea for the sake of preventing smuggling, and in lieu thereof, to substitute what has been called the commutation tax, or a tax upon windows. The amount of the revenue raised from tea was between 700,000l. and 800,000l., and the object of this new act was to proportion it in such a way as to raise upon that article in future no more than 169,000l. which it was supposed would enable the company to sell 13 millions of pounds of tea, instead of five millions and a half. Upon this and the former bills, by which such extensive favours were conferred upon the East India Company, Mr Fox inadvertently at different times with great severity; he asserted, that considering the tenor of these bills and the conduct of administration during the whole session, it was palpable that they were wholly under the direction of the East India Company, and that the company were making rapid strides, after having despoiled and enslaved many millions of men in a distant quarter of the globe, to reduce the inhabitants of this island under their sway. The acts passed, however, New India and received the royal assent. In themselves they were bill by Mr subordinate to the bill for regulating the general Pitt management of the affairs of the company. This act, though framed upon the same model with that proposed by Mr Pitt in the last parliament, yet differed from it in several points. The powers of the board of control were enlarged. In cases of urgency and secrecy, the board were authorized to transmit their own orders to India, without their being subject to the revision of the court of directors. It also vested in the governor-general and council of Bengal, an absolute power over the other dependencies in transactions with the country powers, and in all applications of the revenues and forces in time of war. The receiving of presents was declared to be extortion and disobedience of orders, and all corrupt bargains to be misdemeanours, and punishable as such. The company's servants were required, on their return to England, to lodge in the exchequer a statement upon oath of their whole property. For the effectual punishment of crimes committed in the East Indies, a new court of justice was constituted, consisting of three judges appointed by the three courts, four peers taken by lot from a list of twenty-six, chosen at the commencement of every session of parliament, and six commoners out of a list of forty members chosen in like manner.

Mr Francis opposed in strong terms the general principle of this bill. He said, that by the confession of all parties, the court of directors were too weak to enforce their own orders. To remedy this weakness a clashing power was created, nominal on the part of the directors, real on the part of administration. This he reproached as injudicious, declaring that mere forms were of no use, and ought not to subsist when a constitution was essentially altered. Mr Fox affirmed, as formerly, that this proposed board of control violated the privileges of the India Company, no less than the enactment of his bills had done, while it increased in a greater degree the dangerous influence of the crown. He treated with great contempt the new court of judicature, which he said might fairly be called a bed of justice, as justice would sleep upon it, and thereby embitter the calamities of India, by removing all fear of punishment. Upon the question whether the bill should be referred to a committee of the whole house, the minister was supported by 276 voices, against 61.

When the bill came to be discussed in the committee, Mr Pitt acted in a manner, which afterwards on many occasions served to distinguish his mode of transacting the national business from that adopted by former ministers. Instead of coming forward like the leader of a party, with a measure complete, in all its parts, which was to receive the firm support of his adherents, Mr Pitt not only, of himself, proposed some essential alterations, but adopted those suggested by others, whether his friends or his antagonists. In the committee, the power of issuing orders, in the first instance, was limited to the case of the court of directors neglecting to transmit dispatches to the board, after fourteen days notice, upon any subject the board might think it necessary to take up. The directors were also empowered to elect a secret committee of three members, to communicate with the board concerning such orders as the board might of its own authority transmit to India. The appointment of the commander in chief of the army was withdrawn from his majesty, and left with the company, together with the negative upon nominations in general. Mr Dempster and Mr Eden strongly reproached the inquisitorial spirit of that provision of the bill, by which persons returning from India were required to give an account of their fortunes upon oath. Mr Samuel Smith suggested that merchants in particular should be exempted from this inquisition, and Mr Dundas and Mr Pitt expressed their willingness to admit the alteration; but Lord North having contended that this would make the matter worse, by pointing out to the public a certain class of individuals as subjects of suspicion, Mr Pitt relinquished the whole clause. Mr Pitt himself, also, brought forward some amendments of the constitution of the new tribunal. As the clauses originally stood, the right of accusation rested solely with the attorney-general, or the company. Instead of this limitation, authority was given to any other person or persons to move the court of king's bench for an information. This court was also authorized to issue commissions to the courts in India, for the purpose of taking depositions. The directors of the company, and persons returning from India, were now excluded from the jurisdiction that was to be erected. When the various amendments were reported to the house, Mr Sheridan treated the alterations that the bill had undergone with a degree of ridicule, which proved extremely offensive to the minister. He remarked that 21 new clauses were added, which were distinguished by the letters of the alphabet; and he requested some gentleman to suggest three more, to complete the horn-book of the ministry. He said the whole bill was a contention of two parties, the crown and the company, to outrun each other. The company remonstrated against the bill as it originally stood, because orders were to be transmitted to India without their consent. To please them, they were to have a secret committee of three directors; but the company were not a whit nearer their object, for the committee were sworn to secrecy. They might be present at a court of directors, and see measures carrying on diametrically opposite to what they knew had been adopted by the board of control, without being able to apply any other remedy than a nod, or a wink, or a shake of the head, to intimate that they knew something they dared not to divulge. Mr Fox, again, affirmed with great acrimony that the tendency of the present measures was to sacrifice to the East India Company all that was dear to us, for the corrupt influence and under-hand support of the present administration, and to establish an Indian government of the island of Great Britain. The bill finally passed the house of commons on the 28th of July. In the house of lords it was opposed by Lord Vifcount Stormont and the earl of Carlisle, upon principles similar to those upon which it had been resisted in the house of commons; but the minority there was extremely feeble in point of numbers, and the bill passed on the 9th of August, though it was protested against by a few noblemen, as ineffectual in its provisions, unjust in its inquisitorial spirit, and unconstitutional, as abolishing in certain instances the trial by jury.

All this while Mr Pitt's bill was little noticed by the public at large. The popularity of his name was extremely high. The coalition had become so odious, that the ministry by whom it had been superseeded, were regarded by the nation with the most implicit confidence, and it was taken for granted that everything must be safe in their hands. Neither could the most distinguished talents rescue the leaders of opposition from general neglect. This was in a remarkable degree the case with Mr Burke, whose rich, various, and exuberant eloquence, in competition with which all that remains of antiquity falls short, could not now procure from the house of commons even the appearance of attention. Early in July, the chancellor of the exchequer informed the house of commons, that Sir Elijah Impey, chief judge of the supreme court of justice at Bengal, had arrived in England, in consequence of being recalled by his majesty, pursuant to an address of that house. The acute sensibility, or powerful imagination of Mr Burke, had induced him to interest himself greatly in the sufferings of the natives of India under the British government. He now in vain called on the ministry to enforce the resolutions of the house, respecting Sir Elijah Impey, by bringing him to trial. He repeatedly endeavoured to introduce as the subject of deliberation the reports of the committees of the former parliament respecting Indian affairs; but he was either defeated with little reply, by a motion for the order of the day, or overpowered and silenced by the loud and continual clamour of the house.

During the present session it was found necessary to have recourse to a loan of six millions, to settle the remaining expenses of the American war. The naval establishment was at the same time fixed on a higher scale than in former years of peace. The number of seamen and marines was 26,000; but the military force was not large, as it did not exceed 17,500 men for guards and garrisons. Several new taxes were imposed upon linen and cotton manufactures, hats, paper, candles, bricks, postage of letters, horses, hackney-coaches, persons dealing in excisable commodities, and persons engaging in the amusement of shooting game or hunting. These taxes in general met with little opposition.

The session closed with a motion, brought forward by Mr Dundas, for the restoration of the estates forfeited in Scotland, in the rebellion of 1745, to the descendants or other heirs of the rebels. As this measure had for its object the relief of individuals, whose unequivocal attachment and loyalty to his present majesty, and his family, could not be supposed, even in a less liberal and less enlightened age than the present, to be tainted or affected by the crimes of their ancestors; it met with the perfect approbation of the commons.

In the house of lords, however, it was opposed by the lord chancellor Thurlow, both on the ground of its impolicy and partiality. It was impolitic, he said, as far as it rendered nugatory the settled maxim of the British constitution, that treason was a crime so deep a dye, that nothing was adequate to its punishment but the total eradication of the person, the name, and the family, out of the society which he had attempted to hurt. This was the wisdom, he said, of former times. But if a more enlightened age chose to relax from the established severity, he thought it ought to be done with gravity and deliberation. It was, he said, partial, because the estates forfeited in 1715, and which were forfeited upon the same grounds and principles as those in 1745, were passed over in silence, whilst even a person who had forfeited in 1690, was included in the provision. The bill, however, passed the lords, and received the royal assent.

At this time the British nation enjoyed peace in all quarters of the world. The public attention being no longer excited by national efforts, or the enterprises of any political faction, was easily directed to objects of less importance. Of this nature was a French invention, that of air-balloon or the art of aerostation, which has hitherto proved of more curiosity than utility, but which at this period served greatly to amuse the world. In France, two brothers of the name of Montgolfier, manufacturers of paper, conceived the idea of sending up a bag or balloon full of heated air, and in repeated trials it ascended to a considerable height. M. de Rofier appears to have been the first who, in November 1783, undertook to fly through the air, without having the balloon secured by ropes, in company with the marquis d'Arlandes. Inflammable air, procured from the decomposition of water by means of sulphuric acid and iron filings, or zinc, was next used to fill a balloon made of varnished silk, with which Messrs Charles and Robert ascended, to the astonishment of the people. Vincenzo Lunardi, an Italian, was the first who ventured to gratify the British populace with a similar spectacle. He ascended repeatedly into the atmosphere, from London, Edinburgh, and other places, and on each occasion was carried to considerable distances in the direction of the wind. Various other persons imitated this example, and on the 16th of October of this year, Mr Blanchard, accompanied by Dr Jeffries, ascended, by the aid of a balloon, from Dover, and having soared over the Channel, arrived safely in France. This art, together with the intrepidity of the individuals who practised it, excited much admiration at the time; but the impracticability of giving to the balloon that direction in its progress which the traveller might wish, together with the extraordinary danger attending it, speedily brought it into neglect.

Parliament again assembled on the 25th of Jan. 1784. In the speech from the throne, the object particularly recommended to the attention of both houses, was the final adjustment of the commercial intercourse between Great Britain and Ireland. Farther measures to prevent smuggling were recommended, together with attention to the regulation of the public offices of the kingdom. The first business that was taken up, and which was discussed with great warmth, related to the choice of two members of parliament for Westminster, at the late general election. On that occasion Lord Hood, Mr Fox, and Sir Cecil Wray had offered themselves as candidates. Lord Hood easily carried his election, but between the other candidates the contest was carried on with unexampled obstinacy. The engaging manners of Mr Fox, who had for some time represented the city of Westminster in parliament, enabled him at the present period, notwithstanding the general unpopularity of the coalition, to engage with ultimate success in this contest. After the election had continued upwards of six weeks, it was concluded on the 17th May 1784, leaving a majority of 235 votes in favour of Mr Fox. The high bailiff at this time (being the very day previous to the return of the writ for the election) granted, at the request of Sir Cecil Wray, a scrutiny into the votes which he had taken. This mode of proceeding was protested against by Mr Fox and several of the electors. Immediately on the meeting of the new parliament, the conduct of the high bailiff, in granting a scrutiny under the above circumstances, was vehemently attacked by opposition, and no less vehemently defended by administration. The subject was repeatedly brought before the house, by petitions from the parties, and by motions of Mr Fox and his friends; for that gentleman, in the mean time, sat in the house as a member, having been elected under the influence of Sir Thomas Dundas, for a district of boroughs in the north of Scotland. But on a motion of Lord Mulgrave, it was resolved by a considerable majority, "that the high bailiff of Westminster do proceed in the scrutiny with all practicable dispatch." In the beginning of February in the present year, the business was resumed in the house of commons. The scrutiny had continued eight months, and two parishes out of seven had only been scrutinized, so that it was admitted that probably more than two years longer would be necessary to finish the scrutiny. In the mean time, of the votes for Mr Fox 71 had been objected to in the first parish, and the objections had been sustained only against 25; whereas, in the same parish, out of 32 votes for Sir Cecil Wray that had been objected to, 27 were declared illegal. In the second parish, the scrutiny of which was not finished, Mr Fox had lost 80 voters, and Sir Cecil Wray 60. On the 8th of February, Mr Welborne Ellis moved that a return of the election be immediately made by the high bailiff of Westminster. This motion, together with others which followed it, gave rise to a variety of debates of little importance to general history. At last, on the 3rd of March, the motion having been repeated by Mr Sawbridge, it was carried on a division of 162 against 124, and Lord Hood and Mr Fox were returned as members for Westminster.

On the 18th of February, the attention of the house of commons was called by a motion of Mr Fox to the payment of the debts of the nabob of Arcot. The statute which Mr Pitt had brought forward during the preceding summer, authorized in general terms the court of directors to establish, in concert with the nabob, funds for the payment of such of his debts as should appear to be justly due. The court of directors accordingly ordered the council at Madras to investigate these debts; but the board of control, with some some trifling limitation, ordered the whole debts to be paid out of the revenues of the Carnatic. Mr Dundas undertook in the house of commons the defence of the board of control. He treated with ridicule a declaration made by Mr Francis during the debate, that rumours were abroad, of a collusion between the board of control and the creditors of 1777. He said it was not the first time that his conduct had been misrepresented. It had been said, just with the same degree of truth, that he had received a very large sum of money from an honourable baronet (Sir Thomas Rumbold) on a particular occasion. He had slept perfectly quiet and serene under the former charge, and he trusted he should preserve his temper equally unruffled under the present accusation. He justified the whole of the nabob of Arcot's debts. One set of debts incurred in 1767 consisted, he said, of money borrowed by the nabob at the rate of from 30 to 36 per cent. interest, to pay off a sum due by the nabob to the company, which was at that time in the utmost distress, and the interest had afterwards been reduced to 10 per cent. The second branch of the nabob's debts had arisen from sums borrowed to pay off his own cavalry, which the company had ordered him to reduce, but which he was unable to dismiss from want of money to pay their arrears. He borrowed this money, and the company engaged its credit for the loan. A third class of debts, incurred or consolidated in 1777, were acknowledged by the nabob to be valid, and were only approved by the board of control, subject to his objections, or to objections by the company or the rest of the creditors.

Mr Burke, in a speech containing a full investigation of the subject, stated, that, at the establishment of the British power in India, Madras and its dependencies formed one of the most flourishing territories in Asia; but since that time it had so declined, by the annual drain to England of nearly a million sterling, made by private gentlemen, that, in the year 1779, not one merchant of eminence was to be found in the country. Besides this annual accumulation of wealth, transmitted to Europe, it appeared that the nabob had contracted a debt with the company's servants, to the amount of 888,000l. sterling, which, in the year 1767, was settled at an interest of 15 per cent. About the same time the court of directors were further informed, that one million sterling had been lent by British subjects to the merchants of Canton in China; and that this sum bore an interest of 24 per cent. In the year 1777, a second debt of the nabob of Arcot, amounting to 2,400,000l., was settled at 12 per cent. interest; to this was added another debt, called the Cavalry debt, of 160,000l. at the same interest. The whole of these four capitals, amounting to 4,440,000l., produced at their several rates, annuities amounting to 623,000l. a-year, more than half of which stood chargeable on the public revenues of the Carnatic. These annuities, equal to the revenues of a kingdom, were possessed by a small number of individuals of no consequence, situation, or profession. Mr Burke admitted that the loan of 1767 was the fairest, as he could convict it of nothing worse than the most enormous usury. The interest at 36 per cent. was first paid, then 25, then 20, and lastly the interest was reduced to 10 per cent.; but that all along the interest had been added to the principal, so that of 888,000l. Mr Burke doubted whether the nabob ever saw 100,000l. in real money. With regard to the cavalry debt, Mr Burke stated the facts to be the following. Instead of ready money, the English money-jobbers engaged to pay the nabob's cavalry in bills payable in four months, for which they were to receive immediately at least one per cent. per month, but probably two, that being the rate generally paid by the nabob; and the receipt of a territorial revenue for that purpose was assigned to them. Instead of four months, it was upwards of two years before the arrears of the cavalry were discharged; and, being during all this time in the constant receipt of the assigned revenue, it is not improbable but that they paid off the nabob's troops with his own money. With respect to the debt of 1777, Mr Burke observed that in different accounts the principal sum rose from 1,302,000l. to 2,400,000l. and that the creditors had never appeared the same in any two lists. In the year 1781, they were satisfied to have 25 per cent. at once struck off from the capital, yet they were now to obtain payment of the whole. With regard to all these claims, Mr Burke asserted that the nabob and his creditors were not adversaries but collusive parties; that in fact when the nabob of Arcot gave an acknowledgment of debt to an European, he received no money, and did nothing more than endeavour to support his own influence over the servants of the company by receiving them into his pay. Mr Fox's motion for an inquiry into the conduct of the board of control on this occasion, in supporting these debts, was negatived on a division by 164 against 69. The same motion was made on the same day, with similar success, by the earl of Carlisle, in the house of lords.

Mr Pitt had come into office with the singular good fortune of being highly approved of by the nation patronizes at large, while, at the same time, he was selected to a parliamentary support the royal prerogative and authority, against reform. The majority of the house of commons, then possessed by the coalition. It is always difficult for the human mind to set popular approbation at defiance, and the love of it seldom fails to gain strength in the character of those persons by whom it has once been enjoyed. Accordingly it became one of the features of Mr Pitt's conduct, to attempt at all times, if possible, to reconcile the services expected from him by the crown with the pursuit, or at least with the apparent pursuit, of whatever measure happened for the time to be the object of popular applause. The attempt to procure a reform of the representation of the people in the house of commons, was one of these objects. He had formerly engaged in it while acting in opposition; and now, after he had become the first minister of the crown, he still undertook to stand forward as its advocate. Every candid writer of history must be sensible of the defective nature of the details which he is able to give of the causes which produce or regulate the most important occurrences. These are sometimes brought to light in a future age, but on many occasions they remain perpetually unknown. In what way, or in consequence of what explanations, Mr Pitt contrived to retain the confidence of his master, while at the same time he stood forward as the champion of a reform, which nobody imagined acceptable at court, we do not know. It is certain, however, that after Mr Pitt attained Britain attained to the chief place in the present administration, he still continued to correspond with the leading advocates for parliamentary reform, whose meetings he had been accustomed to attend. In a circular letter to Mr Wyvil, president of a committee of Yorkshire gentlemen, who had embarked in this cause, it was stated that Mr Pitt had given authority to declare "that he would bring forward the subject of a parliamentary reform, as early as possible in the session; that he would support his intended propositions to the utmost of his strength; and that he would exert his whole power and credit, as a man and as a minister, honestly and boldly to carry such a system as should place the constitution on a footing of permanent security." Accordingly, at the commencement of the session, in the debates on the speech from the throne, when the subject was alluded to, Mr Pitt took the opportunity to declare that on this business he laboured incessantly. It was that which of all others was nearest his heart, but at that early period of the session to state his plan specifically was impossible. Much remained to be done, and his ideas were not matured. A reform in parliament comprehended, he said, a great variety of considerations. It related to the essentials and the vitals of the constitution. In this path he was determined to tread, but he knew with what tenderness and circumspection it became him to proceed; and he would request the house to come to the subject, uninfluenced by any of the schemes and hypotheses that had hitherto been suggested.

It was not till the 18th of April, that Mr Pitt called the attention of the house to this important subject. He declared himself aware of the pertinacity he must expect to encounter, in proposing a plan of reform; but he entertained more sanguine hopes of success than formerly, because there never was a moment when the minds of men were more enlightened on this interesting topic, or more prepared for its discussion. He was assiduous to remove the objection of innovation. Anciently, he said, great fluctuations existed in the franchise of election. The number of members had varied, and even the representation of the counties was not uniform. As one borough decayed, and another flourished, the first was abolished, and the second invested with the right. This arose from a maxim, the application of which was entrusted to the crown, that the principal places, and not the decayed boroughs, should be called upon to exercise the right of election. King James I. in his first proclamation for calling a parliament, directed the sheriffs, not to call upon such boroughs to send members, as were so utterly ruined as to be unentitled to contribute their share to the representation of the county. He added, that it was by the treaty of union the number of the members of the house of commons was fixed, and that only from the date of that act was the discretion of the crown upon this point at an end. He said, he was no advocate for a revival of this discretionary power, but that the maxim upon which it was founded ought now to be carried into effect. The outline of his plan was this: To transfer the right of choosing representatives from 36 of such boroughs, as had already fallen, or were falling into decay, to the counties, and to such chief towns and cities as were at present unrepresented: That a fund should be provided, for the purpose of giving to the owners and holders of such boroughs, disfranchised, an appreciated compensation for their property. That the taking this compensation should be a voluntary act of the proprietor, and if not taken at present, should be placed out at compound interest, until it became an irresistible bait to such proprietors. He also meant to extend the right of voting for knights of the shire, to copyholders as well as freeholders. He considered one million as a sufficient fund to be established for purchasing the decayed boroughs. Besides the original 36, he intended to purchase the franchise of other boroughs, and to transfer the right of returning members to unrepresented large towns, that should petition parliament for this privilege. Thus, he said, 100 members would be given to the popular interest of the kingdom, and the right of election extended to 100,000 additional persons. It might be said, he observed, that it did not become that house, for chimerical speculations, to involve their constituents in additional burdens; but he trusted, that in a matter so dear and important to Englishmen, they would not be intimidated by the circumstance of the cost. He conceived the purchase to be above all price. It was a thing for which the people of England could not pay too dear. Alluding to the American war, he asked if the nation would have suffered the calamities to which it had lately been exposed, if there had always been a house of commons, the faithful stewards of the interest of their country, the diligent checks on the administration of the finances, the constitutional advisers of the executive branch of the legislature, and the steady and uninfluenced friends of the people of England? Mr Pitt was aware that there was a sort of squeamishness and coyness in that house, in talking of what might be the proper consideration for the purchase of a franchise. Out of doors it was pretty well understood, that men had no great objection to negotiate the fate and the purchase of seats. But he would ask, was it, after all, such an insult to an Englishman, to ask him to sell his invaluable franchise? was there any immorality in receiving a pecuniary consideration for the cession of a valuable benefit to our country?

Mr Fox disapproved of purchasing from a majority of the electors of a borough, the property of the whole, and of holding out pecuniary temptations to an Englishman to relinquish his franchise, though he declared himself a friend to the general principle of a more equitable representation. Mr Wilberforce supported Mr Pitt's proposal, for this reason in particular, that by putting an end to the representation of the decayed boroughs, future dangerous aristocratical coalitions would be prevented. Mr Pitt's proposal was warmly opposed by Mr Powis, who alleged that the people of England had not called for a reform, as there were only eight petitions upon the table; that the business, therefore, in which Mr Pitt had unfortunately engaged himself, was a volunteer crusade, or a piece of political knight-errantry. He denied that the American war was to be imputed to the representatives of boroughs; and made the important remark, that it was only in consequence of the existence of the elective franchise in a few decayed boroughs, that men of talents, like Mr Pitt himself, had an opportunity of being introduced into the service of their country. Lord North likewise opposed all change, as the people were actually contented, happy, and in full possession of their liberties. berties, which rendered it, in his opinion, unnecessary to inquire minutely how they came to enjoy these advantages. Leave to bring in the bill was refused, by a majority of 248 against 174.

As the sole object, on account of which the English monarchs anciently assembled their parliaments, was to obtain money from their subjects, so the adjustment of the public expenses, and levying adequate supplies, always continue to occupy a large portion of the time of every session of parliament. The prodigal expenditure that had taken place during the late war, still required additional taxes. For this purpose new demands were made upon hawkers and pedlars, and for gloves and other articles. Attorneys were taxed, and the duties on male servants and post horses were enlarged. A tax was likewise imposed upon retail shops. This last tax encountered very persevering opposition in parliament, as well as much unpopularity in the nation. It was represented as extremely unfair, because it fell upon a small number of persons of an industrious character. Being levied in proportion to the shop rent, it fell almost exclusively upon the inhabitants of the metropolis; and it was observed, that, unlike other taxes, the members of parliament who imposed it, were in no hazard themselves of paying any part of it. Of all the taxes, however, which were proposed by the minister, none encountered such sarcastic animadversion as that upon maid servants. Mr Pitt was generally understood to be not very remarkable for his attachment to the other sex, and accordingly Mr Sheridan accused him, upon this occasion, of holding out a bounty to bachelors, and a penalty upon propagation. Sir James Johnstone and the earl of Surrey expressed themselves with much humanity on the subject, on account of the unprotected situation of that portion of our fellow creatures against whom this tax was directed; and Mr Fox suggested the propriety of avoiding to tax persons employed in works of domestic economy and industry, and of substituting a tax upon bachelors, which was accordingly adopted.

But the business that excited more attention than any other department of supply, was that of the ordnance. As early as the year 1792, the duke of Richmond had planned a very expensive system of fortifications, for the purpose of protecting the different dock-yards of the kingdom. The idea had originated from the alarms occasioned by the combined fleet during the late war. The works had been for some time carried on, and the sum of £50,000 annually voted, without much attention being given to the subject. At last, during the present session, Mr Holdsworth, member for Dartmouth, moved, that an account should be laid before the house, of the expenses already incurred on fortifications, at Plymouth, Portsmouth, Gosport, Chatham, Dover, and Sheerness, together with a report of the probable expense of completing the fortifications of Portsmouth and Plymouth; and afterwards on the 14th of March, the annual supply of £50,000 for fortifications was opposed. On this occasion, Captain James Luttrell of the navy defended the duke of Richmond's project, asserting, that such fortifications were necessary to protect not the kingdom at large, for that was not in view, but the principal dock-yards and naval stores, against any sudden invasion. He observed, that veteran troops only could be opposed to veteran troops in the open field; but within forts militia, seamen, and almost any stout, spirited fellow, might be as useful as the most experienced soldier. The possession, for 24 hours, of a situation from which the dock, stores, and shipping, might be assailed with red-hot shot and shells, would be a fatal blow to the navy, and ought to be guarded against, by fortifying the situations in which it might occur. Thus also the navy would not be under the necessity of remaining always at home for the defence of our own ports, but would be enabled to leave them for the purpose of carrying on offensive war. Mr Courtenay opposed the projected system of fortification, together with Captain M'Brice, General Burgoyne, and Colonel Barré. This last gentleman contended, that the superiority of our navy, which ought always to be supported, rendered it unnecessary for us to have recourse to fortification. He made a general attack upon the duke of Richmond, as inexperienced in war, and as lavishhing away money upon an absurd system of fortifications, while he opposeded, by an ill-judged economy, the corps of engineers and artillery, which were the only parts of the army founded in science and professionally learned. He concluded, by proposing, that a council of officers should be consulted on the subject. Mr Pitt defended the duke of Richmond's character, but agreed to this last proposal, of taking the opinion of a council of officers; which put an end to the debate.

A bill passed for better regulating the office of the Acts for treasurier of the navy, without any sort of opposition. An act regulating another bill, to which little objection was made, passed, for the better examining the public accounts; but another bill brought forward by Mr Pitt, for the general reform of public offices, met with strenuous opposition. Mr Sheridan asserted, that it was unnecessary, as the treasury possessed full power to make the reforms. He said, that the bill had no important object in view, that it was a mere rat-catching bill, instituted for the purpose of prying into vermin abuses, and Mr Burke following out this argument, contradicted, in strong terms, the trifling economy which was here proposed, with the prodigality of the ministers in their proceedings respecting the revenues of the Carnatic, in the sanction they had given to the pretended debts due by the nabob of Arcot. The bill, however, was supported by Mr Powis and other independent members; and having passed through both houses, received the royal assent. During the first nine years of Mr Pitt's administration, his mode of management in the treasury department, at the head of which he was placed, appeared to have been this: He investigated, with as much accuracy as possible, the emoluments of all the servants of government, in the various departments of office throughout the country; and wherever it was possible to do so, he retrenched the allowances of the inferior servants of the state, with considerable severity, leaving, in general, the higher and more conspicuous officers, in the possession of their usual emoluments. He introduced a variety of regulations to prevent smuggling, which he successfully repressed; and he also collected the revenue with remarkable attention and accuracy. In former times, the custom with British ministers usually had been, to impose a considerable number of taxes, and to levy these taxes mildly. If the revenue fell short, it was augmented by more taxes levied in the same negligent way. Thus individuals were never severely treated; and the collection of the revenue bore a character of extreme lenity, for which the minister of the day often suffered, in consequence of the popular odium which he was under the necessity of encountering, by proposing new taxes. But under Mr Pitt's administration, the revenue was collected in every department with greater strictness; and thus he was enabled to obtain large sums of money, without the necessity of imposing many new taxes.

One of the most important efforts of legislation that were made during the present session of parliament, consisted of an attempt by Mr Pitt to establish a plan of commercial union between the two kingdoms of Great Britain and Ireland. This plan was proposed to the Irish house of commons on the 7th of February by Mr Ord. It consisted of ten articles, usually styled the Irish propositions. They passed with little debate, and an address of approbation was voted to his majesty. On the 22d of the same month, Mr Pitt introduced the subject to the British house of commons. He stated the false and oppressive policy which had long been exercised by government, in regard to Ireland, the object of which was to render her completely subservient to the interest and opulence of this country. She had been shut out from every species of commerce, and restrained from sending the produce of her own soil to foreign markets. This policy had been gradually relaxed during the present century; but the system had not been completely reversed till within a few years preceding. Yet, although the foreign commerce of Ireland had been placed on a better footing, the intercourse between the two countries had never been established upon equal and reciprocal principles. Mr Pitt proposed to allow the produce of the colonies to be imported into Britain through Ireland, and to equalize the duties on the produce and manufactures of both countries. In return for this concession, he wished to stipulate, that the parliament of Ireland should permanently and irrevocably secure an aid towards defraying the expense of protecting the general commerce of the empire in time of peace. After some debates upon the subject, petitions from Liverpool, Paisley, Glasgow, Manchester, and other places, were presented against the measure, to the amount of 60 in number, the consequence of which was, that from the 16th of March to the 12th of May, the house of commons were almost incessantly employed in hearing counsel and examining witnesses. Certain exceptions were now introduced to the general rule of admitting an equal commerce between the countries. Corn, meal, flour, and beer, were made exceptions in favour of British agriculture. Various regulations were also introduced, to secure an effectual equality of duties upon every particular object of trade, in both countries. The plan, after all its amendments, produced a great variety of debates, in the course of which Lord North expressed his wish for a complete incorporating union of the two kingdoms, in preference to a partial settlement, which might prove the source of perpetual discord. In the house of lords, the resolutions were warmly opposed by the earl of Carlisle, Lord Stormont, Lord Loughborough, Lord Sackville, and the earl of Derby. They were successful, however, in both houses; but by this time a great part of the Irish parliament had become dissatisfied with the plan. A majority of 127 voted in its favour in the house of commons against 108. But against such an opposition administration did not think fit to press its adoption.

The American war, in some measure, withdrew the inclinations of the British nation, for a time, from ideas of conquest and military splendour. Commercial pursuits were now chiefly valued, and formed a great object of pursuit both with the government and the people. To follow these with complete success, it was necessary that a good understanding should be preserved with the neighbouring powers. This was accordingly done, though with some difficulty, in consequence of certain foreign occurrences, not unworthy of attention.

Joseph II. was at this time at the head of the house of Austria and of the Germanic body. Among the various projects which marked his restless career, he Bavaria, formed one of no small importance, which, had it &c., been attended with success, would scarcely have failed to affect the future condition of the Germanic body. He entered secretly into a negociation with the elector of Bavaria, then an infirm old man, for an exchange of that electorate for the provinces of the Austrian Netherlands. The Netherlands were to be converted into a kingdom, and the future title was to be that of Austria, according to some, and of Burgundy, according to others. It appears, that Count Romanow, the Russian minister to the diet of Frankfort, informed the duke of Deuxponts, the nephew and heir of the elector of Bavaria, of the substance of this treaty; and, at the same time assured him, that the treaty would be carried into execution, whether he consented to the exchange or not. The duke gave notice of this alarming measure in the month of January of this year, to the celebrated Frederick II. king of Prussia, who regarded it as a most dangerous project to his own independence, as well as to that of the other German states. He endeavoured instantly to spread an alarm through Europe. He alleged, that the proposed exchange was in the highest degree injurious and unfair. The population on both sides was indeed nearly equal; but the extent of territory on the side of Bavaria, more than doubled that of the low countries, and their respective revenues were equally disproportionate. In Bavaria, agriculture, commerce, and finance, were notoriously neglected; while in the Austrian Netherlands these resources were extended to their utmost pitch; so that, while the territory which the emperor hoped to acquire was capable of the most considerable improvements, that which he gave away might rather be expected to decline in political resources. These circumstances, however, were of little importance, compared with the political consequences which must result from such a measure. The Netherlands being situated at a distance from the great body of the Austrian dominions, had always proved rather a source of weakness than of strength to that power. A considerable revenue was indeed derived from these provinces; but it was often dearly bought, in consequence of the wars occasioned by the vicinity of France. Great political efforts forts had of late years been made by the court of Vienna, to avoid all future grounds of quarrel with the French monarchy. This had been accomplished, by the marriage of an Austrian princess, to the dauphin, now king of France; and the relinquishment of the Netherlands would have gone far towards completing the project. The possession of Bavaria, at the same time, from its vicinity to the rest of the Austrian dominions, would have secured to the emperor a chain of territory from the banks of the Rhine along a great part of the course of the Danube; and would have bestowed upon him such a preponderancy, as would have overturned all shadow of power in Germany that could have resisted the head of the empire. This mighty country, might thus, at no remote period, have been consolidated into one mass, and Austria would probably have instantly ranked in every sense as the first power in Europe.

Thus Frederick II. reasoned. Succeeding events may, perhaps, lead us to suspect, that this acquisition of strength by the house of Austria, might have proved of considerable utility to Europe; but at the time when the plan was proposed, it excited very general apprehensions. The treaty for the exchange had been concluded under the auspices of Russia and France, and to them the king of Prussia addressed his remonstrances. The emperor of Germany and the elector of Bavaria, however, soon found their plan so strongly disapproved of by other powers, that they absolutely disavowed it. The elector, in the Munich gazette, and the emperor by his ambassadors, asserted, that they had never entertained any design of making such an exchange. But the court of France, instead of denying the negotiation, contented itself with replying to the remonstrance of the king of Prussia, that the exchange had been proposed, as depending upon the voluntary arrangement of the parties; and, as the duke of Deuxponts had refused his consent, the proposition of course became fruitless. The empress of Russia, was so far from concealing her accesion to the measure, that she defended it as highly equitable.

Frederick, in the mean time, exerted himself with great avidity in negotiating a league with the electors of Hanover and Saxony, for the preservation of the Germanic constitution, and to prevent such cessions and exchanges of territory as might prove injurious to the balance of power in the empire. A treaty to this purpose was concluded on the 23d of July, and various German princes acceded to it, among whom have been enumerated the elector of Mentz, the landgrave of Hesse Cassel, the dukes of Brunswick, Namur, Saxo-gotha, and the prince of Anhalt. The elector of Hanover appears to have entered with much readiness into the transaction, and from that period a very intimate connexion commenced between the courts of London and Berlin. By some British politicians, however, it was supposed, that the opposition made to the imperial project was unwise, as it tended to excite a spirit of hostility against us on the part of the house of Austria, which, of all the powers of the continent, was considered as one of our most natural allies, in consequence of the ancient hostility which had existed between that power and France, and which was thought likely to break out anew at some future period, notwithstanding the efforts at present made for its extinction. It was probably in consequence of a jealousy of Britain produced by this transaction, that the emperor published an edict totally prohibiting the importation of British manufactures into any part of the Austrian dominions. In the course of the summer a French edict had also restricted the sale of various articles of British manufacture, particularly fadery, hosiery, woollen cloths, and hardware, unless upon payment of duties, the amount of which was equivalent to a prohibition. To counteract these proceedings, by Commerce which the commerce of this country must eventually treaties have been narrowed, commercial treaties were negotiated with the courts of Peterburgh and Versailles. The latter of these was undertaken in pursuance of a provision in the definitive treaty of peace, and the negociator appointed on the part of Great Britain on the 9th of December was Mr William Eden. The acceptance of this appointment was represented by the persons who opposed the present administration as a signal example of political apostasy, as it was said that Mr Eden had not only been the original projector of the celebrated coalition in 1783, but a principal supporter of the resolutions made by the house of commons against the administration of Mr Pitt at the commencement of the year 1784.

Parliament met on the 24th of January 1786. In Meeting of the speech from the throne some notice was taken of parliament's the continental dispute already mentioned, which it was said, had terminated in such a way as to threaten no interruption to the tranquillity of Europe. This relation of excited some debate, in which Mr Pitt declined entering into any defence of the Germanic league, as he debated, and his colleagues in office had not interfered in the formation of it. He said, that accident alone had placed the sovereignty of Hanover and of this country in the same hands, and he desired to have it understood that Great Britain was by no means bound by any leagues entered into by the elector of Hanover. He thought the only way for Great Britain to avoid embroiling herself in the quarrels of Hanover, was for our administration to remain as much as possible unconnected with Hanoverian politics. Hence, unless in some singular cases, he did not account it incumbent upon the minister of this country to lay before parliament arrangements made by the advice of the ministers of that electorate.

Mr Fox, on the contrary, denied that the affairs of Hanover could be separated from those of Britain. He stated the supposition, that it should hereafter appear an essential act of policy for Great Britain to join the court of Vienna against the league of the Germanic princes, and that the elector of Hanover should appear as one of those princes at the head of his own troops. Mr Fox put the question, Whether a British army could be directed to act hostilely against troops led by their sovereign in the character of elector of Hanover? He remarked, that when George I. purchased Bremen and Verden from Denmark, the minister at that time, General Stanhope, used precisely the same language, and told the house of commons, that they had nothing to do with his majesty's conduct respecting his electoral dominions. The consequence, however, was, that the resentment of the Swedish monarch Charles XII. on account of this transaction, threatened Great Britain with a most dangerous invasion: and the very next year. year General Stanhope was under the necessity of demanding additional supplies, to enable his majesty to defray the expenses to which he was exposed in consequence of his purchase.

The first object that came before parliament, to which any great degree of public attention was directed, related to the duke of Richmond's plan of fortifications. In consequence of the debate which had formerly taken place upon the subject in the house of commons, the plan was referred to the consideration of a board of officers on the 13th of April 1785. The duke of Richmond was appointed president of the board; in consequence of which General Conway, Lord Amherst, and Lord Viscount Townshend, declined to act, because he was their junior as an officer. Those who actually assisted were Lieutenant-generals Earl Percy, Earl Cornwallis, Sir Guy Carleton, Sir William Howe, Sir David Lindley, Sir Charles Grey, Lord George Lennox, and John Burgoyne, together with six major-generals. The naval officers were Vice-admirals Barrington and Milbank, Rear-admirals Graves and Lord Hood, together with Captains Hotham, Macbride, Bowyer, Luttrell, Sir John Jervis, and Sir Andrew Snape Hammond. On the 10th of February, Mr Pitt stated to the house of commons, that the board had reported to his majesty their approbation of the plans as perfectly adequate to the defence intended, and as being at the same time the least expensive in the construction, and requiring a smaller force to man them, than any other that could be proposed. He stated, however, that it would be imprudent for him to lay before the public a matter of so serious and delicate a nature as the report of the naval and military officers respecting so important a subject as the defence of our dock-yards; but he presented an estimate of the expense necessary to construct the fortifications which had been prepared by the board of engineers. The adversaries of the measure were not satisfied with the withholding entirely the report of the board of officers. Mr Sheridan contended that Mr Pitt might very possibly have misunderstood the report, which might be liable to different constructions; and in this remark he was supported by General Burgoyne, who proposed, that the minister should lay before the house as much of the report as could be published without danger to the state. He alleged, that, for the sake of obtaining a report in favour of his plan, the duke of Richmond had proposed hypothetical questions, which could not fail to be answered in the affirmative. General Burgoyne said, "he would not be guilty of a breach of confidence, by mentioning the hypothetical cases that had been stated to the board, but that some of them were as extravagant as if it were asked, 'Suppose by some strange convulsion of nature that the straits between Dover and Calais should be no more, and that the coasts should meet and unite, would it not be a politic expedient, and absolutely necessary, to fortify the isthmus or neck of land between France and England?'" It appeared during the debate, that at the meetings of the board of officers the plan had been opposed by Earl Percy and Captain Macbride. This last gentleman pointedly condemned the whole system, asserting the utter inutility of all kinds of fortification for the national defence; and he assured the house, that his opinion was supported by the sanction of Admiral Barrington.

The decision of the house of commons respecting the whole affair was delayed till the end of February, and in the mean time administration consented to produce the greater part of the papers demanded. The subject was again brought forward by Mr Pitt, who proposed the following resolution, "That it appeared to the house, that to provide effectually for securing the dock yards of Portsmouth and Plymouth by a permanent system of fortification founded upon the most economical principles, and requiring the smallest numbers of troops possible to answer the purpose of such security, was an essential object for the safety of the state, intimately connected with the general defence of the kingdom, and necessary to enable the fleet to act with full vigour and effect for the protection of commerce, the support of our distant possessions, and the prosecution of offensive operations, in any war in which the nation might hereafter be engaged." Mr Pitt supported the measure chiefly on this footing, that the protection of our dock-yards was apt to occupy a part of the navy in time of war, and thereby to reduce us to the necessity of merely defensive operations; whereas, by fortifying the dock-yards, the navy might with more safety be sent to a distance, which was with difficulty accomplished in the late war, when it was necessary to make a powerful effort for the relief of Gibraltar. He asserted, that the fortifications proposed would afford a cheaper defence to the dock-yards, than could be obtained by building an additional number of ships of war. He remarked, that such ships could not be indefinitely increased, as in the nature of things there must exist a limit beyond which Great Britain can neither build nor man any additional vessels.

The opposition to the fortifications was opened by the country gentlemen. Mr Balfour contended, that the strongholds now proposed to be built would become seminaries for pretorian bands. He reproached the idea of tearing the ensign of British glory from the mast-head, and fixing it on the ramparts of a military garrison. The measure was further opposed by Sir William Lenox, General Burgoyne, Mr Martham, Mr Windham, Mr Courtenay, Lord North, and Mr Fox. But it was defended by Viscount Mahon, Lord Hood, Sir Charles Middleton, Captains Barclay, Bowyer, and Luttrell, Mr Hawkins Brown, and Mr Dundas. Captain Macbride asserted, that the report was improperly obtained; that the duke of Richmond rather guided and dictated the decision than merely presided in the assembly; that it was the first board of officers in which both question and answer came from the president and senior members: in every other case the junior officer gave his opinion first, but that this established mode of proceeding had been completely reversed. Mr Sheridan discussed the subject at great length. He contended, that the whole project was utterly unconstitutional: that there was a great and important distinction between troops separated from their fellow-citizens in garrisons and forts, and men living scattered and entangled in all the common duties and connexions of their countrymen. He asserted, that the strong military holds now proposed, if maintained, as they must be in peace, by full and disciplined garri- fans, would produce tenfold the means of curbing and subduing the country that could arise from doubling the present establishment; with this aggravation, that the naval stores and magazines, the sources of future navies, the preservation of which was the pretence for these unavailable fortresses, would become a pledge and hostage in the hands of the crown to ensure the unconditional submission of the nation. He asserted that the system would not stop with Portsmouth and Plymouth: that the same board of officers, going a circuit round the coasts of the kingdom, would easily find abundance of places necessary to be defended in like manner: that at various places between Chatham and Sheerness extensive lines had actually been begun under the auspices of the duke of Richmond, which must necessarily be provided for according to the new system.

The result of the debate was, that upon a vote the house divided equally, 160 being upon each side. The speaker gave his casting vote in opposition to the measure. The same question, however, was revived on the 17th of May by Mr Pitt, who proposed, that the plan of fortification should still be carried on at Portsmouth and Plymouth, though upon a more limited scale, amounting in all to 400,000l. Mr Pitt's motion was opposed with much severity of language, and at length withdrawn. On the 7th of June, the sum of 59,780l. was, in consequence of a new estimate, voted for the entire completion of the works already begun.

The attention of parliament was for some time engaged during this session with a proposal, first brought forward by Mr Charles Marsham, for reducing the laws relative to the militia into one act of parliament, and providing for their being annually called out and disciplined. Mr Pitt opposed the calling out of the militia annually; but afterwards, finding a different opinion to prevail, he consented, on condition that though the whole number of men should be balloted for and enrolled, only two-thirds should be actually employed, which would produce a saving of 40,000l. The measure in general of regularly calling out the militia did not pass without opposition. Mr Rolle observed, that it had been found prejudicial to the morals of the people, gave them habits of debauchery and idleness, and always rendered them worse members of society than they were before. The militia bill, after it had passed the commons, did not pass without debate in the house of lords. Lord Vifcount Townshend had been the original mover of the establishment in the house of commons, in consequence of the disgust expressed by the nation, when, in the year 1757, a body of Hanoverians and Hessians were brought into the kingdom for its internal security. That nobleman now enlarged considerably upon the subject. He mentioned the militia of France, of Spain, of Prussia, and of the emperor; and showed how much inferior Great Britain was to any of those powers in this important establishment. He treated with contempt the penuriousness of administration with regard to this invaluable establishment, while the buildings at Somerset-house, the admiralty, and for the ordnance, engrossed so much of the public expenditure. Earl Stanhope (late Viscount Mahon) proposed the following amendment upon the act, without making any addition to the national expense: Ballot, said he, 21,000 militia, and instead of five, let the term of their service be six years. At the end of three years ballot 21,000 more; of this number call out, train, and exercise, only 7000 every year. Let this be done in rotation till the whole amount of 42,000 men has been disciplined, being double the number contained in the act. The proposal was only objected to because it was too late in the session to debate the principle of the bill, and that if it were altered in that house it might be totally lost.

The subject which the minister probably wished Mr Pitt's should make a principal figure during this session of sinking parliament, was the proposal of a sinking fund to be applied towards discharging the public debt. He had occasionally mentioned it, during the preceding session, as a great and important national measure which he intended to bring forward. Accordingly, early in the present session, Mr Pitt moved that certain papers should be laid upon the table of the house of commons, to enable them to form an estimate of the annual amount of the national revenue, as well as the amount of the public expenditure, from which they might judge of the existing disposable surplus, and of the sum it would be farther necessary to provide to raise the total to the amount requisite to form the basis of the intended sinking fund. On the 7th of March, Mr Pitt proposed the appointment by ballot of a select committee of nine persons to examine these papers, and to report the result to the house. He stated his intention to be, to take every possible step to give complete satisfaction to the nation in a matter of such general concern; and he conceived that the solemnity of a committee, and the formality of a report, would answer this purpose better than a set of unconnected papers or the affirmation of a minister. The members elected into the committee were, the marquis of Graham, Mr William Grenville, Mr Edward Elliot, Mr Rofe, Mr Wilberforce, Mr Beaufoy, Mr John Call, Mr Smith, and Mr Addington, the two last of whom had been the mover and seconder of the address upon the speech from the throne. After this committee had made its report, Mr Pitt, on the 29th March, proposed his plan to the commons in a committee of the whole house. He congratulated parliament upon the prospects of the nation, in a style of animated eloquence. He remarked that the country had been engaged in a most unfortunate war, which added such accumulation to our immense debts, that surrounding nations, and many among ourselves, believed that our powers must necessarily fail, and we must sink under the burden; but that the day was at length arrived when despondency might be dispelled, and our prospects brightened on every side, when the nation could look its situation in the face, and establish a spirited and permanent plan for relieving itself of its incumbrances. Mr Pitt stated the revenue for the current year, as reported by the committee, to amount to 15,397,000l. The interest of the national debt was 9,275,760l. and the civil list 900,000l. which, together with the whole other expenditure for the army and navy, and other establishments, amounted to 14,478,000l.; of consequence, there remained a surplus of the annual income, above the expenditure, of 900,000l. One million he stated to be the sum annually to be contributed to the sinking fund, and to make up the sum of 100,000l. Britain wanted to complete this amount, he proposed small additional taxes upon spirits, timber, and hair powder and perfumery. He proposed that the sum of £1,000,000 thus made up, should be placed in the hands of commissioners appointed for that purpose, in quarterly payments of £250,000 each, to begin on the 5th of the following July. He wished that the commissioners should consist of persons of rank and distinction; the speaker of the house of commons, the chancellor of the exchequer, the master of the rolls, the governor and deputy-governor of the bank of England, and the accountant-general of the high court of chancery. Mr Pitt said, that, by taking care to lay out the sinking fund regularly at compound interest, the million to be applied would rise to a very great amount, in a period that is not very long in the life of an individual, and is but an hour in the existence of a nation. It would diminish the debt of this country so much, as to prevent the exigencies of war from ever raising it to the enormous height they had hitherto done. In the period of 28 years, the sum of a million, annually improved, would produce an income of £4,000,000 per annum. By placing the sum in the hands of commissioners, to be applied by them quarterly to the purchase of stock, no sum would ever lie within the grasp of a minister great enough to tempt him to infringe upon this national revenue. It could not be done by stealth, and a minister would not have the confidence to come to that house expressly to demand the repeal of so necessary a law.

Mr Fox approved in general of the institution of a sinking fund, but thought 28 years too long a period to which to look forward for the effect of this plan. Before that term was arrived, it was not improbable we might have another war; and a variety of circumstances might occur, which would operate as a temptation to a future chancellor of the exchequer, and a future house of commons, to repeal the act, annul the institution, and divert the appropriation of its stock to the immediate services of the year. He stated two specific objections to the plan. The first was that the sum appropriated ought not to have been made unalienable in time of war. The second objection was, that, by the institution, parliament being bound to nobody but itself, the whole plan was liable to be annihilated by a future parliament. Hence, he recommended a plan formerly proposed, of paying off portions of the national debt by the subscription of individuals, to whom the faith of parliament should be engaged to redeem or repay the sums advanced at certain stated periods. At a future stage of the business, Mr Fox repeated his objections, and at last, in consequence of the acquiescence of Mr Pitt, he introduced an amendment into the plan, of the following nature: That whenever a new loan should hereafter be made, the minister should not only propose taxes sufficient to pay the interest of the loan, but also sufficient to make good whatever it should be found expedient to take from the sinking fund to supply the necessities of the nation. He meant, that if, when a new loan of six millions was proposed, there should be one million in the hands of the commissioners; in such case, the commissioners should take a million of the loan, and the bonus or douceur of that million should be received by them for the public; so that, in fact, the public would only have five millions to borrow.

In the house of lords, the other objection stated by Mr Fox to the constitution of the sinking fund, was urged with some variation by Earl Stanhope. He pointed out in strong terms the danger which would occur, in future wars, of diverting the fund from its proper destination. He remarked that four millions of free revenue, to which the sinking fund was finally to accumulate, would enable a minister to obtain eighty millions by way of loan. He proposed therefore, that books should be opened at the bank to receive the names of such holders of stock bearing three per cent. interest as should consent to accept of £90. for every £100. of their present capital, whenever the public should be desirous of redeeming the said capital at that price, and that all holders of this new stock should be entitled to be paid off before any part of the other public debts should be redeemed; referring always, however, for a time, to the commissioners of the sinking fund, the power of purchasing stock at the market price. In recommendation of his scheme, Lord Stanhope produced the letters of several eminent brokers, bankers, and merchants, and also of Dr Richard Price. Lord Camelford (formerly Mr Thomas Pitt), objected to this proposal, that the plan of paying off the national debt by purchasing it at the market price was more advantageous for the public, because it made a period of war the time in which it would be most easy to discharge the debt. The bill was therefore without any alteration passed into a law.

This establishment of a sinking fund appears to have been the most favourite of Mr Pitt's plans of finance, and that which produced to him the greatest degree of popularity. In consequence of his having remained in power during the long and expensive war which succeeded its establishment, it continued regularly and fully to be carried into effect. When a new loan was made, the minister not only proposed taxes sufficient to pay the annual interest of the new debt, but also sufficient to afford a surplus or sinking fund of one per cent. per annum, to be applied by the commissioners towards the extinction of the debt.

With regard to the value of this, or of any other plan for paying off the public debts of a nation, it is perhaps still somewhat difficult to form a correct estimate. It has been found by experience that the existence of a great public debt has the most powerful influence in giving stability to a government, by attaching to its existence a numerous body of public creditors, who must always dread the consequences of any important revolution in the constitution of the state. This will always be a fortunate or an unfortunate circumstance to a nation, according to the nature of its political constitution. It is good, however, in so far, as it alienates the minds of men from rash and hasty projects of change, which must always be dangerous. With regard to the direct effects of such a fund in diminishing the public debts, it may be remarked, that, from what has hitherto occurred, it does not appear that in the present state of the European nations, eager as they are to engage in frequent wars, any sinking fund can actually extinguish the debts of a nation. The only effect of such a fund, when well contrived trived and steadily adhered to, seems to be that it enables a nation to maintain its credit in very difficult circumstances, and thereby to carry on the accumulation of public debt to the highest possible amount, and thereby to make trial in the completest manner, of all the moral and political consequences of the funding system. But whatever may be the ultimate effect of the particular sinking fund established in 1786, Mr Pitt had only the merit of adopting it and putting it in force; as it is now generally understood, that the project was not of his own contrivance, but only formed one, and that too not the most efficient, of three plans presented to him by Dr Price.

During the present session, Mr Pitt considerably improved the revenue by subjecting to the excise laws the duties levied upon wines. His chief object was to prevent the fraudulent manufacture of wine at home, which was afterwards sold as foreign wine. This he said would be accomplished by excise officers visiting the cellars of dealers in wines. The proposal met with considerable opposition, from the general aversion to the extension of the excise laws, but it was nevertheless carried into effect. When the estimates for the navy were voted, some observations were suggested by Captain Macbride, which are worthy of being recorded on account of their relation to the progressive improvement of the chief defence of the British isles.

He censured extremely the voting very large sums of money for the repair of 60 and 64 gun ships, and observed that our having so many vessels of this sort was a principal reason of the many defeats we had suffered in the last war. The French had not now more than three or four 64 gun ships, and they took care not to build any new ones upon that construction. Another thing against our navy, was that the French 74 gun ships were of 2000 tons burden, while our 74's had been reduced to 1600 tons. Captain Macbride said, he verily believed, that if the number of our ships were reduced by one-third, the navy of England would prove one-third the stronger. He was still more severe in his condemnation of the system of suffering the ships to remain in their copper bottoms during a time of peace. He contended, that if we persisted in this idea, there would be no occasion to argue whether ships of one size or another should be built, for we should soon have no navy in our possession. The French had discovered the folly of the practice, and for some time had left off the mode of sheathing their ships. We ought therefore to do the same, or at least to take off the copper when the ships were to lie long in still water. The copper corroded and ate more into their bolts than either worms or time. The consequence would be, that the instant the ships which had been long laid by were sent to sea, their bottoms would drop out, and thousands of brave seamen would perish in the ocean. The ideas of Captain Macbride were confirmed by Sir John Jervis; and, so far as related to the sheathing with copper, by Captain Luttrell.

At this time the British nation, recovered from the effects of the late war, was proceeding in a train of considerable prosperity. The administration of justice was proceeding at home in the ordinary train sanctioned by the constitution, and produced its usual and natural effects of tranquillity and general satisfaction. The sovereign, in consequence of his domestic virtues and regular life, was personally popular. The members of administration had obtained their offices under circumstances which originally secured the good will of the nation; and no public events had occurred to expose their characters to any severe trial, or to produce an alteration in the public opinion with regard to them. Still, however, the most distinguished members of the late coalition continued to hold seats in parliament, and naturally wished to attract the public notice, and to rescue themselves from the neglect into which of late they had fallen. For this purpose, they appear to have looked towards our Indian empire, for materials upon which to exert their talents, and to demonstrate their public spirit. Their principal effort consisted of an attempt, which was commenced during the present session, by Mr Burke, to bring to trial and punishment Warren Hastings, Esq. late governor-general of Bengal, for crimes alleged to have been committed in that country.

There is something in the nature of the British constitution, or rather, perhaps, of the constitution of every free state, which renders the conquest, or even the acquisition in any form, of foreign territories, not convenient a little inconvenient. In the case of the British American territories, a constitution, less or more resembling that of Great Britain, had been established in every separate colony or province. These separate constitutions produced abundance of internal prosperity to the colonies; but the whole formed a disjointed empire, slightly bound together by a limited executive power, and destitute of a common legislature. An attempt, made by the legislature of the parent state to make laws for the whole of the subordinate communities, gave rise to a war which ended in the dismemberment of the empire. The remaining foreign possessions, such as Ireland and the West India islands, might be supposed to remain in union with the metropolis of the empire, chiefly in consequence of their weakness, which rendered its protection necessary to their safety, or made them incapable of erecting themselves into separate governments in opposition to its will. The territories which had been acquired by the British nation in India, were, in this respect, in a very peculiar situation. It might, perhaps, have been possible, by an incorporating union, and by extending the privilege of representation, to combine into one firm and consolidated government the whole British islands, together with the American colonies: but this must forever be impossible with regard to the territory of Hindostan. That great and fertile country being inhabited by men of a feebler race, and of a different language and character, is incapable of being united to the British nation upon principles of equal political freedom. It had been originally acquired, not by a mode in conquest made under the direct authority of the executive government of Britain; but by a company of British commercial merchants, who, in a manner new in the history of the world, by uniting the military superiority of Europeans with the arts of commercial men, contrived gradually to subjugate one of the fairest portions of the habitable globe, containing a population many times greater than that of their native country. The progress of such a power towards empire, was necessarily attended with the most cruel hardships to the natives of the subjugated country. When the mercantile invaders possessed abundance of European troops, they employed them in making direct conquests of additional territory. When these troops were exhausted by war or by the climate, or having enriched themselves, had returned to Europe loaded with the spoils of the east, and left their former employers in that quarter in a state of considerable weakness, the servants of the company, who remained there, exerted their ingenuity to excite divisions among the native princes. When they could no longer act as principals, they appeared as seconds in every quarrel, and obtained new territories as the reward of their aid. With such views they formed and broke alliances with little delicacy; and, on receiving supplies of troops from Europe, like other conquerors, they were never at a loss for pretences, upon which to extend their dominion.

All this was the natural result of the situation of the British East India Company, with regard to the natives of Hindostan. At the same time, as the jealousy of the neighbouring states of Europe, together with their equal progress in the art of war, had long put an end to the extension of conquests, and produced much political moderation in the transactions of nations, many of the people of the island of Great Britain learned with astonishment, that their countrymen were conducting themselves in Hindostan, in a manner which in Europe would be regarded with the utmost abhorrence. Such feelings, however, were in general lost in the sentiment of national aggrandizement. Efforts, however, had been made to ameliorate as much as possible the future government of India, by subjecting it, by means of the acts of parliament already noticed, in a considerable degree, to the direct authority of the executive government of this country, instead of suffering it to remain totally vested in a company of merchants. Here the present administration appears to have wished that the affair should be suffered to rest, and that whatever was past should be overlooked and forgotten. This, however, did not suit the present views of opposition. Mr Burke, in particular, had been led by an ardent imagination to interest himself deeply in the calamities which had been suffered by the natives of India, in consequence of the conduct of our countrymen. His feelings and the policy of his party at this time coincided; and, accordingly, he endeavoured with much eagerness to bring to trial and punishment the most distinguished person who had of late years acted upon the great theatre of Indian affairs.

Great obstacles stood in the way of Mr Burke's proposed attempt to procure a parliamentary conviction of Mr Hastings. He had to overcome a long series of unpopularity, the personal indifference that had been shown to him by the house of commons, and their indisposition so much as to give him a hearing, together with a great degree of coldness which the nation at large had gradually acquired with regard to all complaints of East India delinquency. All these, however, he surmounted by efforts of the most obstinate perseverance, and of great eloquence, upon the fertile subject of cruelty, oppression, and treachery, committed under the authority of the British government in the east. The public attention was gradually attracted to the subject; and at last it formed the great subject of conversation, and of political remark, in all parts of the British island. To produce this change in the sentiments of the nation, the whole efforts of Mr Fox and the other members of opposition were necessary, in addition to the invectives of Mr Burke.

Mr Hastings had arrived in England on the 16th of June 1785, and on the 20th of that month, Mr Burke had given notice of his intention to move for an inquiry into the conduct of the late governor. On the day of the meeting of parliament, in January of this year, Major Scott, the particular friend of Mr Hastings, publicly reminded Mr Burke of the menace he had thrown out, and requested Mr Burke speedily to decide upon the part he was to take. Accordingly, about the middle of February, this gentleman having resolved to proceed against Mr Hastings, by moving the house of commons to impeach him at the bar of the house of lords, endeavoured to prepare to substantiate the charges which were to be made, by proposing, that the house should order production of various papers; and motions to this effect were renewed by him at different periods. These motions gave rise to a variety of debates, in which Mr Dundas, who now acted as minister for India affairs (being president of the board of control), together with Sir Lloyd Kenyon, master of the rolls, chiefly opposed Mr Burke, and placed considerable difficulties in his way. Mr Pitt appeared also favourable to Mr Hastings; but, upon the whole, he thought fit to assume the character of acting as a candid and impartial judge upon the occasion, without affording protection to the accused party, or favour to the accuser. These debates excited much attention at the time, but are not of sufficient importance to require to be stated in detail in a concise history of the period. At last, in the month of April, Mr Burke presented to the house his charges against Mr Hastings, which amounted to 21 in number, to which an additional article was afterwards added. The charges were of various degrees of importance; and some of them were of such weight as to excite a considerable degree of public interest. Mr Hastings was accused of driving a whole people, the Rohillas, from their territory, without any pretence of justice; or of arbitrarily confiscating the property of the native princes, and of imprisoning them and their servants for the purpose of extortion; of entering into war with the Mahrattas without necessity; and of treacherously delivering the Mogul into their hands on making peace; together with a variety of other charges of less importance. On the 26th of April, Mr Hastings presented a petition, requesting a copy of the articles, and to be heard in his defence against them before any witnesses should be examined. This request was granted; and that gentleman having appeared at the bar, and stated in ample terms the great efforts which he had successfully made for the aggrandizement of the British power in the east, he entered into a particular defence of his conduct, in the particular points upon which he had been accused. He asserted, that the Rohillas were a tribe of adventurers, in driving whom from an usurped territory, he had only assisted; and the princes or princesses, whose property he was accused of having seized for the use of the conquerors, had deserved their misfortunes by. by their treacherous intrigues or rebellion; that the war with the Mahrattas had not been commenced by him, and that the terms of the pacification were almost universally considered as advantageous; that the Mogul had thrown himself into their hands, and was entitled to no protection from the British government. Upon every other point, he asserted, in a similar manner, not merely the innocence, but the meritorious nature of his conduct, resting his defence chiefly upon such arguments as conquering princes use to justify their encroachments upon their weaker neighbours.

On the 1st of June, Mr Burke brought forward, in the house of commons, his first charge, which related to the expulsion of the Rohillas from their country, to the number of 63,000 men, women, and children. On this occasion Mr Burke exerted all his eloquence. He asserted the purity of his motives in his prosecution; and represented it as not merely a question respecting the character of an individual, or brought forward for the mere purpose of inflicting a hardship upon him, but as a measure necessary for the establishment of the principle of responsibility, with regard to the future governors of our distant possessions, and therefore as a national and imperial question, decisive of the good or ill government of millions now existing or yet unborn. He lamented the difficulty of giving full effect to the charges, in consequence of the immense power and influence which the accused governor had enjoyed, which still afforded him protection, and suppressed information. The remoteness of the country, and the little interest which the British nation might take in the destiny of an unknown people, augmented every other difficulty. However, from the honour and humanity of the house he trusted to surmount all obstacles. He described, in interesting terms, the character of the Rohillas, the simplicity of their manners, the prosperity of their country, and their zeal for agriculture and commerce; and denied that there existed any plausible ground to justify the affluence which Mr Hastings had given to one of their rapacious neighbours to expel them from their territory. After a debate, however, the house decided by a voice of 119 against 67, that the charge did not contain sufficient matter of impeachment against Mr Hastings.

The next article of crimination against Mr Hastings, was founded upon his oppressive conduct towards Clit Sing, the rajah of Benares, from whom he first arbitrarily demanded payment of a sum of money, in addition to his ordinary tribute, and, on delay of payment, imposed upon him an enormous fine, of half a million sterling; insulted him by an ignominious arrest, and thereafter drove him from his dominions. This charge was opened by Mr Fox. He was opposed by Major Scott and Mr Grenville, who inveighed against the rajah, as having been unwilling to support the British power in a dangerous contest in which it was at that time engaged, and as having favoured the views of its enemy. By this time, however, the repeated discussions of the subject, which had occurred during the present session of parliament, had gradually begun to interest the public at large. Pamphlets were published, in which Mr Hastings's character was very violently attacked, and as eagerly defended. His conduct as a governor in India, appeared, to the majority of the people, so totally inconsistent with those ideas of equity, which regulate the opinions of men in this country, that a violent degree of popular indignation was excited against him. Hitherto he had been supported in the house of commons by those who usually adhered to administration, though Mr Pitt himself had on all occasions declared his wish to act candidly as a judge, and to avoid treating the matter as a question to be supported by a particular party. Upon this article of charge, concerning the rajah of Benares, he joined the entered into the views of Mr Fox, and declared himself satisfied, that Mr Hastings had in this case acted unjustifiably. On a division, it was determined by a majority of 119 against 79, that this accusation contained matter of impeachment against the late governor-general of Bengal.

During this session of parliament some farther legislative provisions were made for regulating the government of India. On the 7th of March a motion was made by Mr Francis, and seconded by Mr Windham, for leave to bring in a bill to explain and amend the regulating Pitt's India act, which had been brought forward and carried through by Mr Pitt, upon the subject of India affairs. Mr Francis censured strongly three parts of Mr Pitt's act: 1st, That which establishes a double government of India at home, by two boards, the court of directors, and the board of control. 2ndly, He strongly condemned the excessive power, by means of a constant calling voice in his council, which was bestowed upon the governor-general of Bengal. He said that a governor-general understood nothing of his situation, if he thought that any power, directly vested in his hands, would carry half the authority with it that would accompany the united acts of a governor and council. If he trusted to his own exclusive judgment, he would find himself surrounded by some of the most artful men that existed; by natives, who, without our general knowledge, were infinitely sagacious, who observed us attentively, and understood us perfectly; and by some Europeans, who, in every thing but their habit and complexion, were perfect Asiatics. No single unassisted English judgment was a match for such men, and for such peculiar faculties as would collect about him from the moment of his arrival. If he relied on his exclusive power, for want of clear and accurate knowledge he would rarely venture to exert it. Every man who approached him would tell him a different story, or give him a different opinion. He would often doubt, and no vigorous determination could exist in a good mind, that was not preceded by conviction. Even when he exerted his power, it would be feeble and ineffectual against the universal combination and clamour of all ranks and interests, that would be formed to counteract him in every measure that tended to correct abuse or reduce exorbitant emoluments. Lastly, Mr Francis severely reproached the institution, in Mr Pitt's bill, of a special court of justice for the trial of Indian delinquents, which deprived such persons of the privilege of a jury. He alluded, upon this subject, to the petitions which were understood to be on their way from India against this part of the act.

Mr Dundas justified, upon the opinion of Lord Macartney, Macartney, the powers conferred upon the governor-general of Bengal. He asserted the necessity of a new court of judicature, from the voluminous nature of the evidence in the cases of Sir Thomas Rumbold and Mr Hastings, which could not be gone through by the ordinary form of a trial by jury. At the same time he stated his own intention to bring speedily forward a bill for amending, in certain respects, the regulating act of 1784. Mr Francis's motion was rejected, and Mr Dundas, on the 16th of March, brought forward his new bill for the regulation of India. It conferred still farther powers upon the governor-general, authorizing him to act in opposition to the advice of his council when he thought fit to take the responsibility upon himself. The offices of commander-in-chief and governor-general were also united, and the board of control was alone authorized to inquire into the fortunes of persons serving in India. The service there was also divided into branches; and it was declared, that the servants of the company should rise by gradation only in those branches of service for which they had been prepared by their former habits. After a variety of debates in both houses, the bill was passed.

In consequence of the commutation-act, by which the duties upon tea were so greatly diminished, the East India Company had now increased their annual sales of that commodity from six to fourteen millions of pounds. To enable them to carry on this great additional trade, they petitioned the house of commons to permit an augmentation of their capital. A bill for that purpose accordingly passed through both houses in June, authorizing them to receive new subscriptions to the amount of £1,000,211; and to raise an additional sum of £80,000, by the sale of an annuity due to them by government.

The session of parliament terminated on the 11th of July, and during the remainder of the year the British empire enjoyed complete tranquillity. An incident, however, occurred, of a singular nature, which called forth very universal demonstrations of attachment to the person of the king from all orders of men. On alighting from his carriage on the 2d of August, a woman approached his majesty, under the appearance of offering a petition, but at the same time aimed a thrust at him with a knife, which, however, did no harm. Her name was Margaret Nicholson. Being instantly seized and examined by some members of the privy council, with the assistance of several medical gentlemen, she was found to be insane, and ordered to be confined for life in Bethlehem hospital. A public thanksgiving was ordered for his majesty's safety, and addresses of congratulation were sent to court from all parts of the country. These were the more sincere, because the prince of Wales was understood to have attached himself by habits of friendship and intimacy to some of the leading members of the late coalition. The life of the reigning monarch was therefore at this time considered as extremely valuable, on account of the support which it gave to a popular administration, and because it prevented the government from falling into the hands of a young man who was not yet supposed to have risen above the inexperience and follies of youth.

One of the most important measures of Mr Pitt's administration was carried into effect during the autumn of this year. It consisted of a commercial treaty, which, we have already remarked, Mr Eden was sent to negotiate, and which was concluded on the 26th of September of this year. This treaty stipulated, in general terms, that there should be a perfect liberty of navigation and commerce between the subjects of the two kings in all their European dominions, with a view of giving fair encouragement to the produce and manufactures of both countries, by a discontinuance of prohibitory duties, and by putting an end to illicit trade. A particular tariff was adjusted with regard to a great number of commodities, and all articles which it did not include were to be reciprocally imported on the terms allowed to the most favoured nations. It was agreed, that French wine should be subject to no higher duties on importation than those which were paid on the wine of Portugal: that the duty on brandy should not exceed 7s. per gallon: that 30 per cent. ad valorem should be levied upon beer: that the highest duties on works of iron and copper, on cabinet ware and turnery, should not go beyond 10 per cent. ad valorem: that for faddery, 15 per cent. should be paid; for glass and earthen ware, also for cotton and woollen articles, (with a prohibition of goods mixed with silk) 12 per cent.; for gauze 10; for millinery 12 per cent. On cambric and lawn the duty was to be 5s. for about eight yards. Linen manufactured in either country was not to be burdened with a higher duty than was at this time paid for Dutch or Flemish linen imported into Britain; and for linen made in Ireland or in France, no greater sum was to be demanded, in the way of duty, than was now paid on the receipt of Dutch linen in the Irish ports. Each of the monarchs reserved the right of countervailing, by additional taxes on certain commodities, the internal duties imposed on the manufactures, or the import charges paid on the raw material. It was also declared, that if either of the princes should be at war, every thing should be deemed free which might be found in the ships of the respective nations (with the exception of goods usually deemed contraband), even though the whole or a part of the lading should belong to the enemies of the other state.

This treaty appears, upon the whole, to have been acceptable to a considerable majority of the nation. When parliament assembled on the 23d of January 1787, it was announced in the speech from the throne, and formed the first subject of deliberation. Mr Fox Debates on remarked, when the usual address to the throne was the commercial treaty, 1787. mity, between them, which it is impossible to prevent by any measure which human speculation can devise. Nay, he would not hesitate to pronounce, that were such an event possible, it was not to be wished for by any lover of this country. If, as he sincerely wished, this was a mere commercial treaty, the framers of it had only to prove, that the new channel of trade which it opened would not obstruct, or would be more beneficial than all the other ancient channels which this kingdom had long been in possession of, and which had been found to be the sources of her commercial wealth and prosperity. But if, on the other hand, ministers avowed, that the treaty was intended as a political measure, and that they had in view some more close and intimate connexion with France, such as should render it in future more difficult for the two countries to go to war than heretofore; then they would have to show strong and satisfactory reasons for having pursued and concluded a measure so new in the history of these kingdoms, and of such infinite magnitude and importance. He said he might venture, however, to prophesy, that such an attempt, admitting it to be safe and prudent, would prove vain and abortive. However volatile and inconstant the French nation may be accounted, the French cabinet, he remarked, had for centuries been the most steady in Europe. To raise that monarchy to unlimited power had been its unvarying aim; and he affirmed, that there existed no reason to suppose she had abandoned her purpose. He observed, indeed, as worthy of serious consideration, that the army of France was formerly the first in Europe. It was now but the fourth, being inferior to those of Russia, Prussia, and the emperor. On the other hand, her navy was daily increasing, and to that object her whole attention was directed. Was this a favourable symptom of her friendly disposition towards this country? Did it indicate any extraordinary partiality towards Great Britain? Did it not clearly prove, that her confidence was placed upon her continental allies, and that she was looking forward to, and preparing for, some favourable opportunity of indulging her inveterate animosity against her ancient enemies?

Mr Pitt, in reply, opposed the principles stated by Mr Fox, which went, he said, to prove the necessity and policy of a constant animosity with France. He contended, that such a doctrine militates in the most direct manner both against humanity and common sense. He affirmed, that if war is the greatest of all evils, and commerce the greatest blessing that a country can enjoy, it must be the duty of those to whom public affairs are intrusted, to endeavour as much as possible to render the one permanent, and to remove the prospect and dangers of the other. This, he said, was the object of the present treaty. The advantages likely to arise from it would not only strongly operate upon every succeeding administration in both countries, so as to induce them to avoid a war as long as it could be avoided with honour and prudence, but would also strengthen the resources of the country towards carrying on a war whenever it should become indispensably necessary to engage in one. This was, he said, the true method of making peace a blessing, that while it was the parent of immediate wealth and happiness, it should also be the nurse of future strength and security.

The quarrels between France and Britain had too long continued to harass not only those two great and respectable nations themselves, but had frequently embroiled the peace of Europe; nay, had disturbed the tranquillity of the most remote parts of the world. They had, by their past conduct, acted as if they were intended by nature for the destruction of each other; but he hoped the time was now come when they should justify the order of the universe, and shew that they were better calculated for the more amiable purposes of friendly intercourse and benevolence.

On some future occasions, Mr Fox unsuccessfully endeavoured to prevail with the house of commons, previous to coming to any decision upon the French treaty, to enter into an inquiry into the nature of our connexion, and the state of our negotiations, with Portugal, our old ally, in consequence of what is called the Methuen treaty, which had long proved a sure source of commercial advantage. Some disputes were at that time depending with Portugal, respecting complaints made by British merchants; and Mr Fox asserted, that the proper period of treating with Portugal would have been before the conclusion of the treaty with France. This would have demonstrated to the world, that, whilst we were seeking new connexions, we had no intention of sacrificing the old. Mr Pitt, on the contrary, contended, that we had acted wisely, in shewing Portugal beforehand, that we could do without her, when about to open negotiations for the remedy of complaints.

On the 12th of February, the house resolved itself into a committee for the purpose of considering the new commercial treaty with France. In a speech of three hours in length, Mr Pitt entered into a full explanation and defence of the treaty. As the subject is of great commercial importance, and may, at some future period of the British history, again become a subject of consideration, we shall here state the nature of his argument. He first gave a general explanation of the treaty, and afterwards endeavoured to refute the arguments against it, contained in a petition which had been presented in opposition to it, by Mr Alderman Newnham, from certain manufacturers assembled in the chamber of commerce.

He considered the treaty in three points of view; as Defence of affecting our manufactures, our revenues, and our political situation. With respect to the first, he undertook, as affecting our manufactures, on principles of strict reciprocity, yet that this country must, from the nature of the case, unavoidably have the advantage. To understand this, he said, it would be necessary for the committee to consider the relative state of the two kingdoms. It is a fact generally admitted, that France has the advantage in soil and climate, and consequently in her natural produce; while it is equally true, that Great Britain is decidedly superior in her manufactures and artificial productions. The wines, brandies, oils, and vinegars of France, are articles which we have nothing to put in competition with, except our beer. But it is equally clear, that we in our return possess some manufactures, exclusively our own, and that in others we have to eminently the advantage of our neighbours, as to put competition at defiance. Such, said he, is the relative condition, and such is the precise ground, on which it is reasonable to suppose that a valuable correspondence and connection between the two nations might be established. Having each its own distinct staple, having each that which the other wants, and not clashing in the great and leading lines of their respective riches, they resemble two opulent traders in different branches, who might enter into a traffic mutually beneficial. But nothing, he said, could be more evident, than that trade was more or less advantageous to any nation, in proportion to the degree of labour, industry, and capital, employed in bringing its commodities to market, and to the excess in value of the perfect manufactures above the raw materials: and this principle gave a decided advantage to us over the French. For, granting that large quantities of their natural produce would be brought into this country, would any man say that we should not send more cottons by the direct course now settled, than by the circuitous passage formerly used? more of our woollens, than while restricted to particular ports, and burdened with heavy duties? Would not more of our earthen ware, and other articles, which under all the disadvantages they formerly suffered, still, from their intrinsic superiority, forced their way regularly into France, now be sent thither? And would not the aggregate of our manufactures be essentially benefited in going to this market, loaded only with duties from 12 to 10, and in one instance only, five per cent.? The article charged highest in the traffic, viz. fadery, gave no sort of alarm. The traders in this article, though charged with a duty of 15 per cent., were so conscious of their superiority, that they cheerfully embraced the condition, and conceived that a free competition would be highly advantageous to them.

On the other hand, we had agreed by this treaty, to take from France, on small duties, the luxuries of her soil, which our refinements had already converted into necessaries. Was it in the power of high duties to prevent the introduction of them at our tables? Was it then a serious evil, to admit their wines on easier terms? With respect to brandy, the reduction of the duties would chiefly affect the contraband trade. Mr Pitt asserted it to be an undoubted fact, that the legal importation bore no proportion to the clandestine; for while the former amounted to no more than 600,000 gallons, the latter, by the best founded calculations, did not amount to less than between three and four millions of gallons. As this article, then, so completely possessed the taste of the nation, it could not surely be deemed wrong, to give to the state a greater advantage from it than heretofore, and, by crushing the illicit, to promote the legal traffic in it. The oils and vinegars of France were comparatively small objects; but, like the former, they were luxuries which had taken the shape of necessaries, and, by receiving them on easy terms, we could lose nothing.

In the next place, it was necessary to inquire whether in addition to the above, which were the natural produce of France, that kingdom had any manufactures peculiar to itself, or in which it so greatly excelled, as to give us just cause of alarm, on account of the treaty, when viewed in that aspect? Cambrie was the first that presented itself; but in this article, it was notorious, that our competition with France had ceased, and there could be no injury in granting an easy importation to that which we were determined at any rate to have. In every other article, there was nothing formidable in the rivalry of France. Glats would not be imported to any amount. In particular kinds of lace, indeed, they had probably the advantage, but none which they did not enjoy independently of the treaty. The clamours about millinery he thought vague and unmeaning. Viewing the relative circumstances of the two countries in this way, our superiority in the tariff was manifest. The excellence of our manufactures was unrivalled, and, in the operation, must give the balance to England. Another circumstance comparatively favourable to this country above France in the treaty, was the state of population in both kingdoms. We had a market opened to us in a country containing above 20 millions of inhabitants, whilst we admitted France to trade with a nation, that was supposed to contain not above eight millions.

With regard to the effect of the treaty upon the revenue, he remarked, that although a considerable reduction must undoubtedly take place on the duties upon French wines, and even upon Portugal wines, should the provisions of the Methuen treaty be still kept in force, yet this would be balanced by the increased consumption, and by putting an end to the fraudulent manufacture of home-made wine, which was brought to market as foreign wine, a practice which no regulations of excise had hitherto been able to suppress. If any loss, however, should occur, the article of cambrie would alone go a great way towards indemnifying the revenue. He farther remarked, that our most ingenious and laborious manufactures, in steel and other metals, together with various productions of art, being henceforth entitled to admission to France, on payment of a moderate duty, millions of persons would be employed in the preparation of these objects; the taxes paid by whom would greatly augment the revenue. The high price of labour in England, said he, arises chiefly from the amount of the excise, and three fifths of the price of labour are supposed to come into the exchequer.

Upon the political tendency of the treaty, he recur- red to his former remarks. It was objected to, he stated, in as much as it went to compose those jealousies and destroy that rivalry, which had so long subsisted between the two countries, and which, it was stated, was of the most salutary consequence to Great Britain; and it was further intimated, that there was no dependence to be placed on the faith of the other contracting party. The first of these objections had, he said, unfortunately gained some degree of consideration from the uniform practice of the two countries for centuries past; and he was scarcely surprised to hear, even from such enlightened men as he had heard speak upon the subject, that France and England were naturally and necessarily enemies. The fact, he was persuaded, was directly the reverse; for however ambition might have embroiled them with each other, still there had always been, in the individuals of both countries, a disposition towards a friendly intercourse, and the people of France and Britain had each of them virtues and good qualities, which the other had liberality enough to acknowledge and admire. To suppose that any two states were necessarily enemies, was an opinion founded neither in the experience of nations, nor in the history of man. It was a libel on the constitution of political societies, and supposed the existence of diabolical malice in the original frame of man. But, after all, what reason was there to imagine that the treaty was not only to extinguish all jealousy from our bosoms, but also completely to annihilate our means of defense? Was it to be supposed that the interval of peace between the two countries, would be so totally unemployed by us, as to disable us from meeting France in war with our accustomed strength? Did it not rather, by opening new sources of wealth, speak this forcible language, that the interval of peace, by enriching the nation, would be the means of enabling her to combat her enemy with more effect when the day of hostility should come? It quieted no well-founded jealousy, it slackened no necessary exertions, it retarded no provident preparation; but simply tended, while it increased our ability for war, to postpone the period of its approach. That we should not be taken unprepared for war, depended in no degree on this treaty, but simply and totally on the ability and vigilance of the administration for the time being.

The objections of the manufacturers to this treaty, were chiefly these: that the proposed intimate connection with France would afford opportunities of enticing away our workmen, and conveying the tools and raw materials of our manufactures out of the kingdom. To this it was answered: that the law upon these subjects would remain as formerly, and afford the same protection as at present to our manufactures, by restraining the interference of foreigners upon the points alluded to. It was also objected in general to the treaty, that the commodities in which France traded, being the produce of her soil, which could not suffer in their quantities or quality by any lapse of time, whereas, our commodities being principally manufactures, which owe all their value to skilful and ingenious labour, it was to be feared, that the French might by degrees become as industrious and skilful as ourselves, and thereby enter into a successful competition with us, in every branch of our present trade; while our soil and climate rendered it impossible for us to equal them in the articles of their produce. To this objection it was replied, in general, that the different nature of the objects of British and French commerce was favourable to Britain, on account of the superior population employed in bringing our manufactures to market, and, at all events, that the threatened change could not occur in twelve years, which was the whole duration of the treaty. The ministry might also, with justice, have added, that the surest mode of preventing a neighbouring nation from becoming the rivals of any branch of our manufactures, is to supply them with those manufactures cheaply and in abundance, which must have the effect of inducing them to divert their capital and their industry into some more profitable channel. The most likely channel, with regard to France, would be the production of wine, a branch of trade in which Britain never can have reason to regard them with jealousy. Mr Pitt concluded his speech, by moving a resolution, the object of which was, to carry the treaty into effect.

The members of opposition objected to the treaty chiefly upon political considerations. Mr Fox contended that the only situation in which Great Britain could stand, in the general system of Europe, with honour, dignity, or safety, was as a counterpoise to the power of France: This had been our invariable quality, stated in all the most flourishing periods of our history; and it gained this circumstance, operating upon the reflexes ambition of France, not any inward antipathy of mind, nor the memory of Crecy and Agincourt, that made the two nations natural enemies. To prove that no assurances of the friendship of France were to be trusted, when a hope existed of diminishing the power of Britain, he mentioned the correspondence between the French ministers and Lord Stormont, during the first years of the American war, in which they most pointedly disavowed any intention of interference. He observed that, when it was further considered who the monarch was that then sat on the throne of France, a monarch of the most mild and benevolent character, and celebrated for his love of justice; and that the minister who directed his councils was far advanced in the last stage of life, of a feeble and timid disposition, and therefore unlikely to be led away by any new and visionary projects of ambition; not a doubt could be left in any one's mind, but that the French nation was actuated by a regular, fixed, and systematic enmity to this country. France had, indeed, found that Great Britain could not be subdued by direct efforts. Mr Fox, therefore, thought it reasonable to suppose, that she had altered her policy; that, instead of force, she intended to employ stratagem, to prevent our cultivating other alliances, to lessen the dependence of foreign states upon us, to turn all our views to commercial profits, to entangle our capital in that country, and to make it the private interest of individuals in Britain, rather to acquiesce in any future project of ambition, in which France might engage, than come to a rupture with her.

Mr Francis farther enlarged upon these ideas of Mr Fox, and reproached Mr Pitt with a defection of the principles of his father Lord Chatham, the most prominent feature of whose political character was Antigallican. Mr Flood, Mr Sheridan, and others, supported the same sentiments. Mr Powis and Mr Alderman Watson opposed the treaty, as bringing the British commerce unnecessarily into hazard at a time when it was extremely prosperous. The treaty was defended by Mr Grenville, Mr Wilberforce, and Mr Dundas. This last gentleman said that he had heard much excellent political speculation, which, in his apprehension, had little relation to the subject in question: that the treaty had nothing political in its nature, but was merely a measure calculated to put it in the power of Britain to enable her artists to circulate her manufactures in a much greater degree than could ever formerly be done, by opening to them one of the most extensive markets in the world. He contended it was wise to take advantage of a period of peace to extend our commerce, reduce our debts, and enrich the nation. The resolution approved by Mr Pitt was carried by a division of 248 against 118.

In the house of lords, the commercial treaty was opposed with much warmth by Dr Watson, bishop of Llandaff. He contended that we ought not to abandon a commercial system, by which we had risen to our present prosperity, and far less to adopt a system which our ancestors had reproached as detrimental to the welfare and greatness of the nation. The marquis of Lansdowne (formerly Lord Shelburne), defended the treaty with much ability. He said that commerce, like other sciences, had simplified itself, and that the old system, with all its monopolies, prohibitions, protecting duties, and balances of trade, was justly exploded; that it was a proud day for the manufacturers of this country, to see them come down in a body from these stronghold. He denied that the French nation entertained a systematic enmity against Britain, and said, that if commerce was to be free, there existed no reason for making an exception with regard to France. Their wines, brandy, vinegar and oil, are luxuries which we can get elsewhere; whereas they cannot procure, with equal advantage, coals, lead, and tin. He concluded with declaring his opinion, that if this country should decline, it would not be on account of this treaty, but for other obvious causes. If we went on sacrificing the army, the church, and the state, to the paltry purpose of procuring majorities in the two houses of parliament, we could never expect to be prosperous or powerful.

On the part of administration the defence of the treaty in all its stages appears to have been chiefly entrusted to Lord Hawkesbury, (formerly Mr Jenkinson). He was opposed by lords Loughborough, Stormont, and Porchester; but it was carried by a majority of 81 against 35.

During the present session, a plan for consolidating into one act of parliament the whole duties imposed by the statutes of customs and excise, was brought forward by Mr Pitt, that it might be no longer necessary either for merchants, or for revenue officers, to turn over the whole statute book in search of the amount of the duties upon particular commodities. The plan received the universal approbation of the house of commons. The duties imposed upon French merchandise, in pursuance of the late commercial treaty, were also included in the same act, although that part of the measure was resisted by opposition.

On the 28th of March, Mr Beaufoy, member for Great Yarmouth, at the request of the deputies of the dissenting congregations about London, made a motion for the repeal of the corporation and test acts. He observed that the test act was originally levelled against the Roman Catholics, and the corporation act against those sectaries who had agitated the kingdom in the times of Charles I., and during the usurpation, with whose character the dissenters of the present age have nothing in common. Mr Beaufoy contended that, as every man has an undoubted right to judge for himself in matters of religion, he ought not on account of the exercise of that right to incur any punishment, or to be branded with what is undoubtedly a mark of infamy, an exclusion from military service and civil trust. He referred to the examples of Scotland, Holland, Russia, Prussia, and the dominions of the emperor, in none of which he said religious opinions were now made the ground of civil disqualification.

Lord North, who had now lost his fight, opposed the proposed repeal, chiefly on the footing of the hazard attending innovation. He denied that a man is subjected to any punishment, because he does not choose to receive the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, according to the usage of the church of England. He only deprives himself of a privilege which he might otherwise enjoy, and which the law, for the safety of the church, had limited to persons of particular opinions. Mr Pitt supported the same side of the question, from the danger to the established church, which would result from intrusting official situations to dissenters. Mr Fox supported the motion in favour of the dissenters; remarking, however, upon this occasion, that from their conduct in a late political revolution, he could not be suspected of being biased by an improper partiality towards them. The motion was lost on a division of 177 against 100.

On the 20th of April, Mr Alderman Newnham brought under the view of the house of commons, the prince's pecuniary situation of the prince of Wales, whose debts affairs had, by this time, fallen into a state of embarrassment. It appears that, previous to this period, a considerable degree of coldness had been known to subsist between the king and the prince. A judicious historian will scarcely account it worth his while to inquire after any other cause for such a circumstance, than merely that which is to be found in the overpowering influence that the passion of ambition possesses over the human mind, which so seldom permits any monarch to regard, with complacency the person who has the prospect of his succession. In 1783, when the prince came of age, Mr Fox and his colleagues, who were then in office, wished to grant him an annual income of 100,000l. but his majesty insisted that he should only be allowed one half of that sum. In the year 1786 the prince was found to have contracted a debt of 100,000l. exclusive of 50,000l. expended on Carleton-house. He applied to his majesty to obtain relief from this incumbrance. On receiving a refusal, he instantly dismissed the officers of his court, ordered his horses to be sold, the works at Carleton-house to be stopped, and reduced his household to that of a private gentleman. From these savings an annual sum of 40,000l. was vested in trustees for the payment of his debts. This decisive and spirited conduct was represented at court as disrespectful to the king; and from this period his majesty's dissatisfaction with the prince appears to have been no longer concealed. On occasion of the assault made upon the king's person by Margaret Nicholson, it was remarked, that no notice of the accident was sent by the court to the prince of Wales; and when, upon receiving the intelligence, he instantly went to Windsor, he was received there by the queen, but the king did not see him. At this time a French prince, the duke of Orleans, then the richest individual in Europe, was in England, and was said to have made a proposal to relieve the prince from all his pecuniary embarrassments; but this dangerous offer was declined. In these circumstances the prince permitted his situation to be brought before the house of commons, with a view of submitting his conduct to the judgment of the public. Accordingly, on the day already mentioned, Mr Newnham demanded of the chancellor of the exchequer, whether ministers intended to bring forward any proposition for the relief of the prince of Wales; asserting, that it would be disgraceful to the nation to suffer him to remain longer. longer in his present reduced circumstances. Mr Pitt replied, that he had received no command from his majesty upon the subject; without which it was not his duty to bring forward an affair of such a nature. Upon this Mr Newnham intimated his intention of bringing forward a motion upon the subject on the 4th of May. On the 24th of April, Mr Pitt requested to know the nature of the intended motion, declaring his wish to avoid a discussion of the subject. He added, that if it was persisted in, he would be under the necessity of bringing before the public some circumstances of extreme delicacy. At the same time, Mr Rolle, an adherent of the ministry, declared, that the question involved matter, which he threatened to bring into view, by which the constitution both in church and state might be essentially affected. This menace was known to allude to an intimate connexion which was supposed to subsist between the prince and Mrs Fitzherbert, a lady of a respectable Roman Catholic family, with whom the scandal of the times alleged he had undergone the ceremony of marriage both by Catholic and Protestant clergymen, which, however, if true, could have no legal effects, in consequence of the provisions of the royal marriage act. Mr Newnham said, that his intended motion would be for an address to his majesty, to relieve the prince of Wales from his present difficulties. When some members expressed their wish that the affair might be privately accommodated in some other manner; Mr Sheridan declared, that after the insinuations and threats which had been made, the prince could not recede with honour. Mr Pitt said, that his remarks had no reference to the character of the prince, but merely to a correspondence which had taken place relative to his pecuniary affairs.

On the 30th of April, when the subject was again mentioned, Mr Fox, who had been absent during the former debate, stated, that he had authority from the prince to say, that there was no part of his conduct which he was unwilling to submit to public investigation. The allusions made to something full of danger to the church and state, he treated as a tale fit to be imposed only on the lowest of the vulgar; and said, that his highness was ready, in the other house, as a peer of parliament, to give his majesty, or his ministers, any assurances or satisfaction on the subject they might require. Mr Fox, at the same time directly assured the house, that the whole story alluded to was untrue. The result was, that an accommodation took place. The prince was allowed an annual addition to his income of £10,000, and £81,000 was granted by parliament for payment of his debts.

During this session some discussions occurred relative to the privileges of the Scottish peerage. In the house of lords, after considerable debate upon a motion of Lord Hopestoun, a resolution was adopted to enforce an ancient resolution of the house, of January 1708-9, which declared, that Scottish peers, created British peers by patent since the union, have no right to vote at the elections of the fifteen who represent the body of the peers of Scotland in the British parliament. In the house of commons also, on the 23rd of May, a question concerning the same body was agitated. It arose in consequence of the succession of the earl of Wemyss to that earldom, whose eldest son, Francis Charteris, who thus became Lord Elcho, represented the boroughs of Lauder, &c., in Scotland. By the ancient law of Scotland, the eldest sons of peers could not sit in parliament, which consisted of one house only. By the treaty of union it is declared, that the two kingdoms should participate in the rights and immunities of each other. Sir John Sinclair moved, that a new writ should be issued for electing a member in the room of Francis Charteris, Esq., now become the eldest son of a peer in Scotland, and therefore incapable of representing the boroughs of Lauder, &c. In support of the motion some very early precedents were alluded to; and, after some debate, the motion was carried.

But the subject which, above all others, still continued during the present session to occupy the attention of parliament, was the accusation of Mr Hastings, rings. After examining Mr Middleton and Sir Elijah Impey as witnesses, in the beginning of February, Mr Sheridan, on the 7th of that month, opened the third charge against Mr Hastings, which asserted, that without justice, or any excuse of political necessity, he had seized the lands, and confiscated the treasures, of the begums or princesses of Oude, the mother and grandmother of the reigning nabob, whom he had even compelled to become the instrument of this robbery. On this occasion the hall of the house of commons was uncommonly crowded. Mr Sheridan's speech lasted five hours and a half. The subject of the charge was well fitted for displaying all the powers of pathetic eloquence, in consequence of the rank and the sex of the parties whom, on this occasion, Mr Hastings was accused of having treated with the most barbarous rapacity, treachery, and cruelty. Every advantage was taken of these circumstances, and Mr Sheridan's discourse was considered as a model of splendid and impressive pleading. When he sat down, the whole house, which was filled with members, peers, and strangers, instantly joined in a loud and long-continued tumult of applause, expressing their approbation in the irregular mode of repeatedly clapping with their hands. Mr Burke declared it to be the most astonishing effort of eloquence, argument, and wit united, of which there is any record or tradition. Mr Fox said, that all that he had ever heard, or read, when compared with it, vanished like vapour before the sun; and Mr Pitt affirmed, that it surpassed all the eloquence of ancient or modern times, and possessed every resource which genius or art could furnish to controul and agitate the human mind. After a suspension of debate, some of Mr Hastings's friends attempted to speak in reply, but found it impossible to procure themselves to be listened to with any appearance of favour. At last some members proposed, that for the sake of decorum, the debate should be adjourned. This proposal was carried; and on the following day Mr Francis resumed the charge, which was opposed by Mr Burgels, Major Scott, Mr Nichols, Mr Vanfittart, and Mr Alderman le Mescier. After having heard the arguments on both sides, Mr Pitt rose, and after having stated the sense he entertained of the high importance of the whole procedure against Mr Hastings, affirmed, that he himself had endeavoured to give to every fact stated in each particular charge, the fullest investigation, and to perform his duty honestly, impartially, and conscientiously. On the present occasion, he declared... Britain. clared himself fully satisfied, that criminality was brought home to Mr Hastings, though not perhaps to the full extent alleged by the accusers. The motion for accusation was carried, upon a division of 175 against 68.

At future periods of the session other charges were brought forward, and opened by Mr Thomas Pelham, Sir James Erskine, Mr Windham, and Mr Francis. Mr Pitt adopted the cause of the accusers, and on some occasions, though in a mild manner, Mr Dundas did the same. At one period of the accusation, Lord Hood stood forward in a very solemn manner, and requested the attention of the house to the consequences of proceeding, with too scrupulous a nicety, to canvass the conduct of those who had filled stations abroad of high difficulty and important trust. Certain actions, which appeared to those at a distance in a very criminal light, were yet, he alleged, on a nearer investigation, perfectly justifiable on the grounds of absolute and indispensible necessity: should the fear of an impeachment by parliament be hung out to every commander in whose hands was placed the defence of our national possessions, it must necessarily operate as a dangerous restraint to their exertions, when it was considered that no general or admiral had scarcely ever been fortunate enough to conduct himself in the performance of his duty, without occasionally falling into circumstances, in which the public service compelled him to do things in themselves not pleasing to his feelings, nor strictly legal, but, from the indispensible necessities of their situation, perfectly justifiable. The example set by the house of commons in the present instance, would, he said, forever stand before our future commanders, and create a great and dangerous clog to the public service. This, he was confident, would be the effect of punishing any harsh and severe, but perhaps necessary and indispensible, acts of power, which the favour of India had, for the public good, been found to commit. Mr Pitt opposed the application of these sentiments to the case of Mr Hastings, asserting, that no adequate political necessity had been pointed out which could justify his conduct.

In the course of the proceedings, it appeared that several members were disposed to consider the merits of Mr Hastings as compensating his crimes, and thus, though they voted his conduct criminal on particular occasions, they had an intention of voting in his favour, when the general question should come to be proposed, about the propriety of proceeding to impeachment. Upon this subject, Major Scott took an opportunity to declare, that Mr Hastings and his friends wished to decline such a mode of defense; and he read to the house as a part of his own speech, a paper signed by Mr Hastings, in which he requested that if a general vote of criminality should pass against him, by that house, they should farther proceed instantly to an impeachment, that he might have an opportunity of defending himself judicially.

A committee was at last appointed, to prepare articles of impeachment against Mr Hastings. It consisted of the following persons, whose names we shall recite, as exhibiting a list of the most active leaders of opposition at this period. Mr Burke, Mr Fox, Mr Sheridan, Sir James Erskine, the right honourable Thomas Pelham, the right honourable William Wyndham, the honourable St Andrew St John, John Anstruther, Esq., William Adam, Esq., M. A. Taylor, Esq., Welbore Ellis, Esq., the right honourable Frederick Montague, Sir Grey Cooper, Sir Gilbert Elliot, Dudley Long, Esq., Lord Maitland, the honourable George Augustus North, General Burgoyne, and Mr Grey. An attempt was made, by Mr Burke, to procure the appointment of Philip Francis, Esq., as a member of this committee, but without success. He was rejected by a majority of 96 to 44, on account of his being considered as the personal enemy of Mr Hastings, whose measures he had opposed, and with whom he had fought a duel, in India. On the 25th of April, Mr Burke presented the articles of impeachment. They were read, and ordered to be printed and considered, on the 9th of May. Upon that day Lord Hood repeated his former arguments against them, and was supported by Mr Smith, and the celebrated Mr John Wilkes. This last gentleman insisted strongly on the silence of the natives of India, upon the subject of the tings dreaded opprobrium laid to have been practised against them, and attributed the greatest part of what appeared criminal in the conduct of Mr Hastings, to the craving and avaricious policy of this country, whose demands had, in some instances, driven Mr Hastings to the use of means not strictly justifiable. The amount of the charges, he said, supposing the facts true, was this, that Mr Hastings, by opprobrium, by injustice, and corruption, had obtained for the East India Company, nine millions and a half sterling. Mr Wilkes thought the acts complained of politic and just; he could not honestly vote for the impeachment of Mr Hastings, while he benefited by his misdeeds. He added, that it appeared incomprehensible to him, how gentlemen who condemned his actions, suffered a day to pass without proposing retribution to the sufferers.

The lord advocate for Scotland (Ilay Campbell, Esq.) supported this last idea. He considered the necessities of the company, and the dangerous crisis of their affairs, as grounds of justification for the strong measures pursued by Mr Hastings, in order to extricate them. The company having actually reaped the benefit of them, and so far approved of them as never to have signified any intention of restitution; he could not, he said, conceive with what propriety Mr Hastings could be impeached for them. He further observed, that Mr Hastings had been most unjustly blamed for various acts of administration, in which he had only concurred with others; that the order of dates, as well as the state of the council at different periods, ought to have been more distinctly attended to in the charges. Mr Hastings had enjoyed the casting voice in the council, only for a very short time, and even then, Mr Barwell was equally responsible with him. Afterwards Mr Wheeler, Sir John M'Pherson, Sir Eyre Coote, and Mr Stables, came gradually into the council. At one period, a coalition took place between Mr Hastings and Mr Francis. How do the prosecutors account for this? And is Mr Hastings alone to be made accountable, during that period? He concluded with observing, that in fugfelling what had occurred to him, in favour of Mr Hastings, he had avoided saying anything upon the topic of his extraordinary services in general, being doubt- ful whether upon the supposition of guilt, in any specific article, a set-off, as it is called, or balancing of accounts between merits and demerits, would relevantly be admitted; at the same time, it was a mode of defense not altogether new. The proceedings in Lord Clive's case left no room to doubt, that he owed his safety to it; and there was still a more illustrious example of it in history, the case of Epaminondas the Theban general, who, when tried for his life before the tribunal of his country, for having kept the command four months after he should have laid it down, acknowledged the crime, but enumerated the glorious actions which he had performed; and said he would die with pleasure, if the sole merit of these were ascribed to him. This speech procured his acquittal.

The lord advocate thought Mr Hastings well entitled to make use of similar language to the British nation, when accused of having acted illegally in India.—Mr Alderman Townhead justified Mr Hastings on the ground of state necessity; and said that he deserved the highest applause, for not having stood upon so paltry a punctilio, as considering whether a measure was rigidly correct and legal, when the immediate necessity of the company's affairs, and the salvation of India, were concerned.

Mr Pitt reproved the idea of a set-off in very strong terms. He acknowledged that many measures during the administration of Mr Hastings were uncommonly brilliant, and that, in these, his merits were unquestionable. But he trusted that no man, who seriously regarded the honour of the house of commons, would expect that the justice of the country could admit of any compromise whatever. He was sorry his honourable friend, the lord advocate of Scotland, should conceive the honour of the representatives of the British nation not interested in relieving the British character from that degree of infamy and degradation to which it had been reduced. The accusations which had been preferred against Mr Hastings were not only the cause of the house, but, in his opinion, involved the honour of every member individually. Nor had he let hesitation, from the importance of the subject, to say it affected the government of the whole empire. It was a question which shook the basis of the constitution, for it was literally a question of responsibility. The policy and interest of the country required, that an example should be made of the delinquent. The necessity of this, he urged particularly from the disposition he perceived in the abettors of Mr Hastings to justify him on the principles of expediency and necessity. The question of impeachment was carried by a majority of 175 against 89. And on the 10th of May, at the bar of the house of lords, Mr Burke, in the name of the house of commons, and of all the commons of Great Britain, impeached Warren Hastings, Esq. late governor-general of Bengal, of high crimes and misdemeanors; and informed the lords that the commons would with all convenient speed exhibit and make good articles against him. On the 21st of the same month, upon the motion of Mr Burke, Mr Hastings was taken into the custody of the sergeant at arms of the house. He was immediately admitted to bail by the house of lords. He was bound in the sum of 20,000l. and two sureties in 10,000l. each. As the session of parliament was prorogued on the 30th of May, the trial was necessarily postponed to another session; and by various delays it was ultimately protracted to an extraordinary length.

The accusation of Mr Hastings, from the attention which it excited, and the talents which were exerted on the accusation of it, is undoubtedly an event of considerable importance in British history. It ended in the acquittal of Mr Hastings, the party accused, but at the same time the immense expense which he incurred, and the uneasiness which he must have suffered from the high degree of odium which in the minds of many persons was excited against him, must undoubtedly have amounted to a very severe punishment. A British house of commons held him guilty of inhumanity, rapacity, perfidy, and tyranny, towards a numerous and a civilized people that had been subject to his power. These sentiments were so widely diffused throughout Great Britain, that the minister of the day, always studious of popularity, thought it necessary to join the general current of opinion; and this will probably be regarded as one of the instances in which Mr Pitt must have exerted some kind of singular dexterity in preserving the confidence of the court, while he seemed to favour a prosecution that was not generally considered as acceptable there.

The period is perhaps scarcely yet arrived when a British historian can so far elevate his mind above temporary and national prejudices as to enable him to appreciate correctly the merits of Mr Hastings, or the reasonableness of the accusations that were brought against him. In making the attempt, it is necessary to consider correctly the situation in which that gentleman stood. He was invested by the British East India Company with absolute power over the people and the soil of a large portion of Hindoostan, for the purpose of governing that country for the profit of the company, and to acquire more extensive territories for them if possible. To fulfil the service in which he was employed, it was necessary that he should procure a large revenue for the company, and at the same time that he should enable the young men of rank, whom they sent out in their service, speedily to return to Britain with great wealth; these being the only objects on account of which the East India Company, or the British nation, had made great efforts for the conquest of the east. But these objects evidently imply not that Hindoostan was intended to be mildly and generously governed, but that it was to be plundered to the utmost extent that it could bear without ruin. Accordingly, in 1782, Mr Hastings, in one of his letters, complained strongly of the cruelty of his situation, and of the expensive establishments and offices which he was under the necessity of constituting in India, to gratify the avarice of his employers, declaring that he had at that time about him 250 persons, the younger sons of the first families in Britain, all looking up to him for patronage, and expecting to be put in possession of sudden riches. These riches, it is evident, could not be drawn from the natives of Hindoostan without much oppression; and when this oppression produced rebellion, or combinations of the native princes against the British power, it became necessary to be guilty of farther oppression, or more grievous extortion, to collect means whereby to subdue the resistance of the vanquished people. It is admitted on all hands, that Mr Hastings was almost unboundedly successful in the service of his employers. He annually sent home great numbers of men loaded with the plunder of the east, while at the same time, by great activity and intrepidity, he collected resources wherewith to maintain and extend the British power, and was enabled to support it in all quarters against the most extensive combinations of the princes of that country.

There are two systems of morality, according to which the character of such a man as Mr Hastings may be tried. The one is founded upon the principle of national attachment or patriotism, and the other upon the great law of humanity. According to the first of these, that conduct is most worthy of applause, which tends in the highest degree to promote the aggrandizement of our native country. Considered in this point of view, the merits of Warren Hastings have seldom been surpassed; and he may justly be ranked among those men whose actions the historians of Greece and Rome, and indeed of almost all nations, have recorded with boundless admiration, and he may well stand a comparison with the first heroes of antiquity. Such difficulties as perplexed Alexander of Macedon, at the head of a great and well-disciplined army, repeatedly yielded to the energy of his talents, which often enabled him, with the most trifling force, and by the mere ascendancy of his personal character, to exercise a despotic authority over an immense country, and to extend the territories of his employers. It is true, that he plundered the provinces of the East, but it was to aggrandize and enrich his country that he did so. He accounted their persons and fortunes as of little consideration, because he was the devoted servant of Britain. Accordingly, the most patriotic people in Europe, the French, whose public enemy he had been, regarded him with admiration, and uniformly extolled his actions as more than human.

In opposition to all this, if we are to weigh the conduct of Mr Hastings by those maxims of morality, which consider the greatest interests and law of humanity as the rule by which human actions ought to be regulated, there can be no doubt that he must be condemned. He can only be regarded as one of those robbers of nations, to whose crimes historians and poets have given a fatal celebrity. He was guilty of plundering and oppressing a pacific race of men at the extremities of the earth, in whose affairs neither he nor his country had any right to interfere. But the great criminals in this case were the British East India Company, the British legislature, and the British nation, that sent him upon such a service. Mr Hastings was only the guilty servant of a guilty people; and it surely ill became the British house of commons, that had authorized the acquisition of conquests, that is, the exercise of murder and oppression in the East, and whose constituents had become rich by the plunder or the profits of such enterprises, to accuse as a criminal the most successful servant of the state. We therefore apprehend, upon the whole, that Mr Wilkes and the lord advocate for Scotland rested Mr Hastings's defence upon an unanswerable footing, when they considered his crimes as services, which he was employed by his country to perform for its aggrandizement, for the moral rectitude of which he could not be responsible to that power, from which he derived his commission, and which thought fit to reap the fruit of his labours.

During the year 1787, the state of amity into which Britain and France might be regarded as brought, in consequence of the commercial treaty, seemed likely to be disturbed, in consequence of the affairs of Holland. The grounds of difference were speedily adjusted; but the events from which they rose are worthy of notice, on account of their tendency to explain some future occurrences in the history of Europe. The state of the Dutch republic, or, as it was usually called, the United Provinces, was always regarded as of much importance by Great Britain. That country, being situated upon the mouths of the navigable rivers which communicate with some of the most important parts of the European continent, is the great pallage by which our manufactures reach their place of ultimate sale and consumption. In our most important efforts for reducing the power of France, the Dutch had acted along with the British nation. Their stadtholder, who had at all times dreaded the power of the French, was disposed to look for protection towards Britain, and was not understood to have concurred zealously, during the late war, in supporting the cause of France and America. The present stadtholder had united himself by affinity to the court of Prussia, with which that of Great Britain had of late begun to be upon terms of great cordiality.

In the history of the United Provinces, during two centuries, two parties are always found struggling for the Dutch superiority. The first, was that of the house of Orange, which had been first raised to power in consequence of the talents of its chiefs, united with their rank and property, which had induced the states to intrust to them the direction of their armies; first, against the Spanish monarchy, from which the provinces had originally revolted, and afterwards against the power of France. By their great public services, the princes of the house of Orange had established, in their own favour, a kind of hereditary claim to the offices which they held in the republic, of stadtholder, captain-general of the forces, and admiral. Thus there existed, in their persons, in succession, a kind of limited monarchy, by which the Dutch republic was influenced and led, rather than formally governed.

The second party in the Dutch republic consisted of a kind of aristocracy, composed of the senates or town-councils of different cities, which possessed the power of nominating to the vacancies in their own order, that is, of electing their own successors in office. This party was usually denominated the party of the states, or the republican party. Its members were, in point of form, the sovereigns of the country, and were the wealthiest individuals in it. The chief constitutional control which the stadtholder possessed over them, consisted of a regulation violently established by William III, prince of Orange, in 1674, whereby he enjoyed a negative over the elections to town governments, and a power, in certain cases, of introducing members into them. It is to be observed, however, that the mass of the people at large, who always find greater safety under the dominion of one great superior, than of a multitude of petty local chiefs, were always decidedly attached to the house of Orange, or to the power of the stadtholder, in opposition to that of the town senates or republican party. The ancient nobles also, together with the clergy of the established church, and the officers of the army and navy, adhered to the same family, and thereby enabled it on ordinary occasions to support its power.

During the participation of the United Provinces in the late war against Great Britain, a proposal had been made to enrol bodies of volunteers in the different towns, for the purpose of internal defence. The senates of the towns, that is, the aristocratical, or, as they called themselves, the republican party, encouraged the formation of these armed bodies of burghers (over whom at their first enrolment they had complete influence), as affording them a kind of counterpoise against the military power, which, though paid by them, was commanded by the stadtholder. These bodies of citizens, as soon as they were trained to the use of arms, began to feel the importance of their own existence. The opinions propagated in North America, during the war, were known all over Europe. They were received with considerable avidity by the Dutch volunteers, and produced in that country a kind of third or democratic party, whose object was to procure for the citizens at large of the towns, a share in the nomination of the magistrates. As the volunteer associations were originally the creatures of the senates or aristocracy, for the purpose of counteracting the power of the stadtholder, they appear, in their first movements, to have been directed by that faction. One of their first movements was at Utrecht. The armed burghers, amounting to 2243, presented a petition to the states of the province of Utrecht, requesting them to abolish the regulation of 1674, whereby the stadtholder was enabled to influence the nomination of the magistracy. They presented an address of a similar nature to the town senate of Utrecht, and to the prince of Orange. As might have been expected, the answer of the prince was unfavourable; but the magistrates of Utrecht, in compliance with the wishes of the armed burghers, proceeded to fill up a vacancy in their own number, without consulting the prince. This event occurred in January 1784; but it appears, that in the course of the same year, either from the intrigues of the stadtholder's court, or from a dread of betaking themselves to the assistance of the new and dangerous democratic party, the states of the province and town senate of Utrecht, deserted the cause of the armed burghers, whom they themselves had instigated to action, and recalled or annulled the steps towards innovation which they had taken. The senate and the armed burghers continued alternately to intimidate each other. By degrees, a spirit of political reform, or innovation, diffused itself from Utrecht to the different towns in the provinces where bodies of volunteers or armed burghers had been established. The armed burghers of Utrecht elected a representative body to watch over the management of public affairs; and various other towns did the same. These representative bodies soon quarrelled with the old senates; and the prince of Orange appears to have had it in his power to select which of the parties he might think fit as his adherents. His ancient enemies were the aristocracy or town senates. At the same time, as he could not, without the dangerous measure of a total alteration of the constitution of the United Provinces, derive a regular and legal support from the bodies of armed burghers, he resolved to support the ancient magistracies, and to rest his power upon its ancient footing of influence over these magistracies, though he knew them to be his rivals in political importance. Hence he supported the magistrates of Utrecht and other places against the armed burghers. It would seem, that the aristocracy of the province of Holland, who had always been the most decided enemies of the family of Orange, were not satisfied with the disposition of the prince to support the ancient constitution, and resolved to attempt to undermine or overthrow his power, even at the hazard of a popular or democratic revolution, which must be equally fatal to their own. This aristocratical body, however, was not of an enterprising character, and rather waited than attempted to direct the course of political events. In consequence of the support given by the stadtholder to the senates of Utrecht and other places against the armed burghers, these last, through the whole United Provinces, became disposed to act in opposition to him. In the meanwhile, the populace of the Hague retained their usual attachment to his person and family. On the 4th of September 1785, twelve volunteers of the corps of the town of Leyden, appeared at the Hague in uniform. The populace, offended by this appearance of defiance to the prince at the place of his residence, attacked and drove them into a neighbouring house, the windows of which they broke. A part of the garrison, without interfering with the populace, took the volunteers into custody, and sent them home privately by night. This riot served as a pretext to the states of Holland to supersede the prince of Orange in the command of the garrison at the Hague, which they intrusted to the deputies of Haarlem, a town that had been zealous in opposition to the stadtholder. As this prince had been engaged in endless controversies with the states of Holland, in which the strength of the aristocratical party was concentrated, this affront drove him to the resolution of leaving the Hague, which he did on the 14th September 1785. He applied for protection to Great Britain, who caused he had supported in opposing the resolution to give any assistance to the Americans in the late war, and to the king of Prussia, the uncle of his wife. The aristocratical party, on the contrary, made application to the court of Versailles, which it had supported by entering into the confederacy against Great Britain, and from which it had always received encouragement. At the same time, it endeavoured to derive assistance, from uniting its cause extensively with that of the armed burghers.

In the mean time, the celebrated Frederick, king of Prussia, died, and was succeeded by his nephew, Frederick William, the brother-in-law of the stadtholder. The French court appeared to espouse with vigour the united aristocratical and democratical parties in the United Provinces. The new king of Prussia seems to have hesitated to engage in a dispute with France; and there is little doubt, that had the French court, on this occasion, appeared ready to act with vigour in support of their party in Holland, the stadtholder must have fallen before his enemies; neither is it probable, that Britain would, at this time, have engaged in a new war on his account. But the French monarchy, Britain, monarchy, under a benevolent and well-meaning but weak prince, was, at this period, rapidly sinking into a state of great feebleness, in consequence of the extreme embarrassment of its finances. A negociation was at first proposed between the courts of France and Berlin, for the purpose of adjusting, in some friendly manner, the differences between the stadtholder and his enemies. The weakness of France, however, becoming gradually more obvious, Prussia and Great Britain were soon induced to act a more decisive part in the affairs of Holland, chiefly, it is believed, in consequence of the suggestions of the British ambassador at the Hague, Sir James Harris. The stadtholder had established himself towards the eastern parts of the Dutch territory at Nimeguen. Though himself a man of little activity or enterprise, his princess was of a different character. She ventured to undertake a journey to the Hague, unaccompanied by her husband, probably with a view to what actually happened. On the 28th of June 1787, she was arrested by some troops of the opposite party; and this circumstance afforded an excuse to the king of Prussia for interfering in the internal affairs of the United Provinces, to demand a reparation for the insult offered to his sister. A Prussian army, commanded by the duke of Brunswick, the brother-in-law of the king of Great Britain, immediately prepared to invade Holland. To secure additional aid to the prince of Orange, a treaty was concluded between Great Britain and the landgrave of Hesse Cassel, for the assistance of 12,000 troops. In the meantime, the United Provinces remained in a state of great internal distraction. The defects of their political constitution had originally occasioned the appointment of a stadtholder; and no simple system was yet substituted in its stead, which, by doing away the distinctions of states and provinces, might unite the force of the country, for the purpose of enabling it to resist such powerful aggression as that with which it was now threatened. The promised aid from France did not arrive; troops had been levied by the states of Holland, and the chief command of them was intrusted to the rhingrave of Salm, to whose character little confidence appears to have been due. The duke of Brunswick, at the head of a powerful army, entered the country. The reputation of the Prussian armies in Europe was at this time extremely great; and the frontier towns of Holland, which were capable of resisting severe sieges, were now taken with facility, and without a struggle. It is unnecessary to detail the progress of the Prussian troops, which was extremely rapid, and in little more than a fortnight, the republican party found itself confined to the city of Amsterdam. This city was besieged on the 1st of October. After much negociation, and a variety of attacks, this city, which had so often given laws to other states, admitted a foreign garrison to the possession of its gates. The influence of France was thus totally annihilated in Holland. The power of the stadtholder was restored; but it was restored by the power of Prussia and of Britain. The consequence was, that a decided enmity to these two countries, from that period, took possession of the minds of a great portion of the inhabitants of the Dutch territories. At the same time, the people of that country appear, from this period, to have fallen into a kind of despair, with regard to their national independence. Their ancestors had derived importance from the relative weakness of the neighbouring states; but from the experience of the event which now occurred, the people of Holland were made sensible of their own weakness, amidst the powerful nations by which they were now surrounded.

When the British parliament met on the 27th of November 1787, the most remarkable circumstance alluded to in the king's speech was the affairs of Holland. He said, that the disputes which subsisted in the republic of the United Provinces had become so critical, as to endanger their constitution and independence, and were thereby likely in their consequences to affect the interests of his dominions. That upon this account, he had endeavoured, by his good offices, to maintain the lawful government in those countries, and had thought it necessary to explain his intention of counteraffecting all forcible interference on the part of France. That in conformity to this principle, when his most Christian majesty, in consequence of an application for assistance against the king of Prussia, made by the party which had usurped the government of Holland, had notified to him his intention of granting their request, he had declared, that he should not remain a quiet spectator, and had given immediate orders for augmenting his forces both by sea and land. That in the course of these transactions, he had thought proper to conclude a subsidiary treaty with the landgrave of Hesse Cassel. That the rapid success of the Prussian troops, having soon after enabled the provinces to re-establish their lawful government, and all subjects of contest being thus removed, an amicable explanation took place between him and the most Christian king; and both parties had engaged to disarm, and to place their naval establishments on the same footing as at the beginning of the year.

When the address to the throne was moved as Mr Fox's usual, Mr Fox took an opportunity of expressing the fullest approbation of the measures that had been lately pursued, and took credit to himself, as one of those who had invariably been of opinion, that this country Holland, is at all times deeply interested in the situation of affairs upon the continent, and ought, whenever occasion required, to take an active and vigorous part in preserving the balance of power in Europe. He reminded the house, how frequently he had warned them of the ambition of France when the commercial treaty was under discussion in the last session. He had been thought too severe and uncandid, from the distrust he had then expressed of its friendly professions, but within one year from the conclusion of that treaty, our new friend, this faithful commercial ally, had engaged to support, in Holland, a party in opposition to us, usurpers of the lawful government of their country. He approved of the principle of the subsidiary treaty with Hesse Cassel, as enabling us to reduce our military establishments at home, and to apply the public treasure to the increase of our naval strength, the natural force of Great Britain.

In the house of lords, the bishop of Llandaff, after Bishop of expressing his satisfaction in seeing the republic of the Llandaff's United Provinces again united in its views with Great Britain, stated a difficulty which occurred to him, with regard to the principle in the law of nature and nations, which could authorize Great Britain and Prussia to to interfere by force, in settling the internal disputes of an independent state. Was it a right which every individual possessor, of afflicting those whom he sees oppressed by unjust force? No; that would be to take the question for granted, since the opponents of the stadtholder will not allow that he was oppressed by unjust force. Was it the right of afflicting the majority of a country, to recover their ancient civil constitution from the encroachments and usurpation of a faction? He hoped the fact would bear out such a justification; but he was not well enough acquainted with the wishes of the majority of the Dutch nation upon that head. Upon what other ground did he approve of our late interference? It was on the ground of self-preservation; for if France had gained Holland, we had been undone. When it is said that Holland, and the other states of Europe, are independent states, the proposition is true only to a certain degree; for they all depend one upon another, like the links of a chain; and it is the business of each to watch every other, lest any one become so weighty and powerful, as to endanger the security or political importance of every other.

During the late interference of Great Britain and Prussia in the affairs of Holland, while a dread was entertained, that the discontented party in the provinces might receive assistance from France, and preparations were made on that account for fitting out a fleet, the lords of the admiralty had promoted 16 captains of the navy to the rank of admirals. In making this promotion, a selection had been made, in consequence of which upwards of 40 senior captains had been passed over, a circumstance which gave rise to various debates in parliament. To understand the subject, it is necessary to remark, that in 1718 an order of council directed the lords of the admiralty, in promoting officers to the rank of admirals in the navy, to prefer the senior captains, providing only they were duly qualified for the rank to which they were to be promoted. By a subsequent order of 1747, the lords of the admiralty were authorized to place such captains, as should be found incapable by age or infirmity of serving as admirals, upon the list of superannuated admirals, which had usually received the appellation of the list of the yellow admirals. In the promotion lately made, the board of admiralty had offered to place upon this list of yellow or superannuated admirals, most of the captains who were passed over; but conceiving themselves, from their capacity of future service, entitled to the rank of acting admirals, they had refused the retreat that was offered them, and a general difficulty prevailed among the officers in the navy, on finding that their hopes of reward for the most active services, must at all times depend on their interest with the first lord of the admiralty. On the 20th of February 1788, Lord Rawdon, in the house of lords, stated their case, and proposed an address to his majesty upon the subject. The first lord of the admiralty, Lord Howe, justified the exertion of a discretionary power, by the board, in promoting navy captains to the rank of acting admirals, as a man might be fit to command a single ship, who ought not to be intrusted with the care of a fleet. Lord Sandwich affected the impropriety of interfering with the executive government in an affair of this nature, and Lord Rawdon's proposal of an address was rejected.

Vol. IV, Part II.

The same subject was brought before the house of commons, in various forms, during the month of April, by Mr Baftard. He stated the merits of some of the individual captains who had been passed over as very great, and their services conspicuous, and affected, that the most notorious partiality had been exerted in the promotion. He was supported by almost all the navy officers who had seats in the house, particularly Sir George Collier and Captain Macbride, who declared, that nothing short of ruin to the service must follow, if such a system of promotion was to continue. Mr Pitt defended the admiralty, by asserting, that no sufficient degree of misconduct had been stated, as could authorize the interference of parliament with the exercise of its powers. The board was protected, by a small majority of 150 against 134.

During the present session some debates were occasioned, by certain plans of the duke of Richmond. His project of fortifying certain places in Great Britain had been negatived by the house of commons; West India but a part of the same plan, consisting of erecting fortifications for the defence of the West India islands, was still persevered in, and required an additional land force in that quarter, of 3064 men. He also wished to purchase certain powder mills at Waltham abbey, upon a project that government should manufacture gunpowder there, for its own use. He farther proposed, to raise a corps of artificers for the ordnance department, to be divided into companies, and subjected to martial law. This last plan met with considerable opposition, but was carried by administration, along with the other projects.

A bill was at this time brought into parliament, for Act against subjects to higher penalties than formerly, all persons who should export wool from the country, intending thereby to confirm the monopoly enjoyed by our own manufacturers in that article. The manufacturers asserted, that 13,000 packs of British wool were annually smuggled into France, which tended to raise the price of the commodity, against our own manufacturers. Several country gentlemen opposed the bill, as an unjust hardship upon the profits of land in this country, which ought to have the world open, as a market for its productions. But the minister, who was aware of the importance of enjoying popularity with the commercial, that is, with the most active part of the British nation, gave full countenance to the bill, in consequence of which it passed into a law.

In stating the situation of the revenue, Mr Pitt made flourishing remarks, descriptive of the improving state of the country, which are not unworthy of being here noticed. He said, that the receipt of the permanent taxes, in the year 1787, exclusive of the land and malt tax, had been 13,000,000l. The receipt of the taxes in the year 1783, had been 19,184,000l. Thus, there was an increase of revenue of three millions, of which not more than one million and a half accrued from new taxes. In the trade, the navigation, and the fisheries, the progressive improvement bore an exact proportion to the increased revenue.

In the year 1772 our imports were L. 14,500,000 Our exports 16,000,000 In 1787 the imports were about 15,800,000 But the exports were 16,600,000 In like manner our navigation had increased.

The Newfoundland fishery in 1773 produced 516,000 quintals. In 1786 it produced 732,000 quintals. In 1773 the tonnage in the Greenland fishery was 27,000 tons. In 1786 it was 53,000 tons.

The southern whale fishery, a new and very valuable branch of trade, which we only took up at the beginning of the last war, had also equally prospered.

In this fishery, in 1785, there were employed 18 ships, producing 29,000l. In 1787, there were employed 38 ships, producing 107,000l.

On the 8th of June the chancellor of the exchequer, Mr Pitt, called the attention of the house to the compensation which was intended to be made to the American loyalists, on account of the losses sustained by them in consequence of their adherence to this country during the American war. He divided the loyalists who had made claims of compensation into four classes. In the first class he ranked those who had resided in America at the commencement of the war, and who had been obliged to abandon their estates and property, which were seized and confiscated by the Americans. He proposed that such loyalists of this class as had not lost more than 10,000l. should receive full compensation; for losses above that sum, and below 35,000l., he proposed to grant 90 per cent. on the excess of losses above 10,000l.; where the losses were above 35,000l., and not above 50,000l., 85 per cent. was proposed to be allowed on the excess of losses above 10,000l., and where the loss was above 50,000l., 80 per cent. was to be allowed on all above 10,000l. The next class of claimants consisted of those who had lost property in America, but who had resided in England during the war. To the amount of 10,000l. Mr Pitt proposed to indemnify these also in full; but that from all whose claims amounted from 10,000l. to 30,000l., a deduction should be made of 20 per cent. and a further additional deduction of 20 per cent. in progression upon every additional 50,000l. claimed. The third class of claimants consisted of loyalists, who enjoyed places, and exercised professions in America, and by adhering to this country, had lost their incomes. He proposed to put upon half pay those whose incomes amounted to no more than 400l. per annum, and to grant 40 per cent. upon any excess of income above 400l. per annum, unless the income should exceed 1,500l. per annum, in which case, 30 per cent. only should be allowed upon the excess of income above 400l. per annum. Lastly, it was proposed to pay the full amount of their claims to persons connected with West Florida; because, by the treaty of peace, that country had been ceded by Britain to a foreign power. Mr Pitt concluded by moving, that, to satisfy these claims, 1,228,239l. should be voted to the several American claimants for losses, &c. and 113,952l. 14s. ½d. to the Florida claimants. The motion was unanimously agreed to. The liberality with which the British nation acted upon this occasion, merits approbation, as an instance of the wisest policy, from its tendency in future discontents, or insurrections in the subordinate parts of the empire, to secure the attachment of persons of property to the cause of the metropolis. As the claims of the American loyalists were stated by themselves, and not scrutinized with extreme severity, it was generally understood that these persons were in very few instances ultimate losers by the part which they had taken, a circumstance of which the public did not disapprove.

The trade carried on by Great Britain and other European nations upon the coast of Africa, for the purpose of purchasing negro slaves to be employed in the cultivation of the West India islands, and certain parts of the continent of America, does not appear, till of late years, to have been considered with that general attention, which a practice, so abhorrent in its nature to the mild principles of modern policy and manners, might have been expected to excite. This may probably have been owing, partly to the distance of the object, which tended both to conceal the sufferings, and to lessen the sympathy of the public for the unfortunate sufferers; partly to the connivance of politicians, unwilling to examine too severely into the necessity of the means by which distant colonies were enabled to pour luxury and wealth into the mother countries. The first public attempt, we believe, that was made to put a stop to this traffic, was by the Quakers of the southern provinces of America, who, soon after the establishment of their independence, not only presented, for this purpose, a strong and pathetic address to their several legislative assemblies; but actually proceeded, as it was said, in many instances, to emancipate the slaves that were in their possession. In Great Britain the same fact appears also to have taken the lead; and, after the example of their American brethren, presented, in 1787, a similar petition to the parliament of this kingdom. The cause soon after became extremely popular, and was taken up with great zeal and earnestness by various descriptions of people. A society was formed, and a considerable sum of money subscribed, for the purpose of collecting information and supporting the expense of an application to parliament. A great number of pamphlets were published upon the subject; several eminent divines recommended it from the pulpit, and in printed discourses; and, in the present session, petitions against the African slave-trade were presented from the two English universities, and from several of the most considerable towns and corporations in the kingdom.

By a sort of general consent, Mr Wilberforce had been intrusted with the care of bringing the business into the house of commons; but being prevented by bad health, Mr Pitt, on the 9th of May, having mentioned this circumstance, proposed that the house should enter into a resolution, to take into consideration the circumstances of the slave trade early in the next session. He added, that the privy-council had appointed a committee to inquire into the matter; and, that next session, the result would probably be laid before the house to facilitate their investigations. Mr Fox and Mr Burke expressed their regret on account of the proposed delay. They lamented, that the privy-council, who had received no petitions from the people, should have instituted an inquiry; and, that the house of commons, whose table was loaded with petitions from every part of the kingdom, should not have instituted an inquiry at all. If they suffered the business of the house to be done by the privy-council, they were abdicating their trust, and making way for an entire abolition of their functions. Sir William Dolben called the attention of the house to the condition of the slaves in one point, which he alleged called for an immediate remedy. He said he neither alluded to their sufferings at home from the hands of their cruel countrymen, nor to their sufferings from their unfeeling masters, the planters in the West India islands; but to that intermediate state of tenfold misery which they suffered in their transportation from the coast of Africa to the West Indies. He entered into a short detail of the horrors of that dreadful passage, which he said was scarcely less fatal in its effects upon the British sailors, than upon the wretched slaves themselves; and he declared himself ready to call evidence to the bar to prove the fact. This, he said, called aloud for a remedy, and that remedy ought to be applied immediately. If parliament did not apply some remedy, without delay, between the present session and the beginning of the next, 10,000 lives would be lost. He wished, therefore, that this grievance should be taken into consideration, independent of the general question; and that some regulation, such as refraining the captains from taking above a certain number of slaves on board, according to the size of their vessels, obliging them to let in fresh air, and provide better accommodation for the slaves during their passage, and such other regulations as should suggest themselves to the house, should be adopted. This proposal met with general approbation; and, accordingly, a bill was brought forward, and passed into a law, for regulating the transportation of the natives of Africa to the British colonies in the West Indies. It met with some unfavourable opposition from the merchants of Liverpool, who petitioned, and were heard by counsel, against it.

In the present session, the affairs of India still continued to occupy the attention of the legislature and of the public. During the apprehensions of a rupture with France, on account of the affairs of Holland, government had resolved to send out four additional regiments to India, on board the company's ships, for the protection of our possessions in that quarter; and the proposal had been received with approbation by the court of directors. After the danger was past, government still adhered to their resolution of sending out four regiments, with a view to form a permanent establishment of the king's troops in that quarter. In consequence of this circumstance, a question arose with the court of directors of the East India Company, about the expense of sending out, and hereafter paying, these troops. By an act passed in 1781, the company were declared liable for the expense attending such troops only as should be sent out upon their own requisition. But administration now contended, that the act brought forward by Mr Pitt in 1784, which gave to the board of control a power of counteracting the orders of the court of directors, and of directing the application of the company's revenues, ought to be understood to authorize that board to carry into effect the proposed measure. The court of directors, however, obtained the opinion of some eminent lawyers in their favour; and, accordingly, refused to take the troops on board the ships that were about this time to sail for India. For this reason, on the 25th of February, Mr Pitt proposed, in the house of commons, that all difficulties should be removed by a declaratory act, afflicting the intention of the legislature, in the act of 1784, to have been agreeable to the construction put upon it by the board of control. This mode of proceeding was strongly opposed. It was said, that the claims of government upon the company ought to be tried in a court of law, instead of being brought before the house of commons, where administration professed an undue influence. It was contended, that the measure was in itself ill-judged, as it would have been more economical to have suffered the company to have raised four regiments, which would have enabled them to provide for many of their own officers, 600 of whom were living in India in very distressful situations, in consequence of having been reduced at the peace; or the mode might have been adopted, with better advantage to the company, of lending out recruits to complete the king's regiments at that time in India, which would have enabled them to avoid the additional burden of all the officers of four new regiments. The measure was farther condemned, as tending to produce confusion in India, by putting the power of the sword into two hands, and giving disgust to the officers in the company's service. It was added, that the power now claimed by the board of control, of keeping an army of the king's forces in India, to any amount they thought fit, and of paying it out of the revenues of the company, was unconstitutional, as it enabled the king, contrary to the bill of rights, to keep a standing army in time of peace.

But the point of view in which this declaratory act was chiefly resisted, referred to its tendency to deprive the East India Company of the whole management of its own affairs, and the patronage arising from its revenues, which at the time that Mr Pitt's bill was passed, had never been understood to be the intention of the legislature or of government. Mr Pulteney and some other members, who usually voted with Mr Pitt, now declared that they supported his bill in 1784, only because it appeared to preserve uninjured the rights of the East India Company; that the construction attempted to be put upon it in the declaratory bill, made it equally obnoxious with the celebrated bill rejected by the lords in 1783, with only this difference, that what the one had for its professed object openly and without disguise, the other was attempting to effect by fraud and dissimulation. Mr Powis argued, from the various amendments which the act had received in its passage through the house, that no such ideas of its extent, as were now endeavoured to be established, were then entertained of it, much less expressed; and that if they had, it must have been rejected. Mr Baring, one of the directors of the East India Company, declared, that Mr Pitt's bill was generally understood at the time, by that board, to be utterly incapable of the unlimited construction now put upon it; and Colonel Barré declared, that having asked one of the directors, why they had suffered the bill to pass unresisted and with the sanction of their concurrence, the director had admitted with him, that the bill darkly and tacitly conveyed powers to the board of control, as hostile to the rights of the company as Mr Fox's bill; but that they had a confidence in the administration which introduced it, and had no doubt of their exercising those powers with gentleness and moderation. These sentiments excited great triumph on the side of Mr Fox and his friends, who loudly congratulated themselves upon the complete justification which his India bill had now, they said, obtained, by the tacit confession of his adversaries themselves.

In support of the declaratory act, Mr Pitt contended, that the express object of the institution of the board of control, was to take the entire management of the territorial possessions and the political government of India out of the hands of the company, leaving them only the direction of their commercial concerns. The board of control was in future to be responsible to the public for the prosperity and safety of our Indian possessions, and was therefore to be invested with all the powers necessary for the due discharge of its important duties. He denied that administration in 1784, had held any other language with regard to its nature or the authority it was to possess. With regard to the economy and policy of the present measure, he admitted, that there ought not to be two armies in India; but said, that the army which existed there, ought undoubtedly to be the king's; and solemnly protested that his conduct was in no degree influenced by the prospect of additional patronage to be acquired by the crown. He added, that it was the intention of government to divide equally the new commissions with the East India Company. Upon the constitutional question of a standing army being kept in India by means of the company's revenues, he stated, that all the existing laws relative to standing armies, were, in his apprehension, extremely inaccurate. If any danger was apprehended from the present act, he had no objection to receive any clauses that might be offered, from whatever part of the house they might come. On the 5th of March, the bill was carried by a majority of 122 to 125. In the house of lords, the marquis of Lansdowne expressed the utmost astonishment, that any one who recollected what had passed in that house in the years 1783 and 1784, could contend for a moment, that the principles of the present bill were contained in that of 1784. Their lordships had refused to suffer the bill of 1783 to be sent to a committee, because it was bad in its principle; and yet the act which they afterwards passed in 1784, as now intended to be explained, manifestly holds one and the same principle. The preference of the latter to the former, could not have been given on account of its particular provisions. He, at least, should have preferred that which gave the government of India to parliamentary commissioners for four years. It would now have expired. But if the power proposed should once be given to the crown, what time and exertion would not be required to recover it, or to keep within due bounds the influence of the crown, when all the patronage of India was added to the influence it already possessed? If it was capable of erecting a fourth estate, and overturning the constitution in fourth hands, how much more capable of mischief would it be when united in one of the three estates, and that the crown, there being eleven millions sterling per annum to administer?

Upon the whole of this subject, it is, perhaps, no unfair remark, that, if the augmentation of the power of the crown was at this period indeed a misfortune, it was a misfortune which the conquest of India appears to have rendered inevitable. The East India Company, by whom the conquest had been made, was admitted, by all parties, to have shewn itself unfit to govern that great country. The management of it, therefore, naturally devolved upon the executive branch of the British constitution, unless the constitution itself was to be endangered, by intrusting the exercise of new and unusual powers to some of the other branches of the legislature, for whose due exercise of such powers the laws had made no provision; or, unless a new kind of authority or power was to be created, as attempted by Mr Fox's India bill, the result of which, as a political experiment upon the constitution, or mode of administering a part of the affairs of the empire, was necessarily hazardous, because heretofore entirely without example.

The attention of the nation still continued to be occupied in no small degree by the prosecution of Mr Hastings. The members of the committee, which during the preceding session had prepared the articles of impeachment, were now appointed to act as managers for the house of commons in conducting the trial. On the 13th of February, the trial commenced with extraordinary solemnity in Westminster-hall, which had been fitted up for the purpose. About 11 o'clock the house of commons, preceded by the managers, came from their own house into the hall, Mr Burke leading the procession. Thereafter, the house of peers came in procession, preceded by the clerks of parliament, the matters of chancery, the sergeants at law, and the judges. The inferior peers came first, and the lord chancellor last. The procession closed with the royal family, including the queen; the prince of Wales advancing last. In passing to their seats, they bowed to the throne. That and the following day were consumed in reading the articles of impeachment, and the answers of Mr Hastings. On the 15th of February, Mr Burke began an oration, which he continued duration ring that and four following days, and in which his five days' talents were exerted with great splendour, and his eloquence listened to with admiration. After an appeal to the justice of the court, on the part of the people of India, who came, he said, in the name of the commons of Great Britain, but in their own right, to the feet of the imperial justice of the kingdom, from whence were originally derived all the powers under which they had suffered, he entered into a detail of the history of Hindostan from the earliest times. He gave a luminous view of the revolutions that had occurred in it; of the civil and religious institutions, together with the arts, customs, and manners, of the various classes of its inhabitants. He traced the progress of British intrusion, and minutely described the establishments made by our countrymen. He gave an animated account of the blessings which India might have derived from a communication with the most enlightened nation in Europe; but lamented, that, instead of acting as friends or instructors of the natives, our countrymen had marked their way by treachery and rapine, and taught vice rather than virtue. He expatiated on their usurpations of power, and their frequent enormities. He specified the acts of Mr Hastings, representing them as beyond all bounds arbitrary and rapacious, and endeavoured to hold him up to execration as a monster of tyranny. The governor-general had attempted to justify his oppressions, pressions, by asserting that the Asiatic governments were all despotic; that he did not make the people slaves, but found them such; that the sovereignty he called to exercise was an arbitrary sovereignty, and that he had exercised it in no other way than was done by the other sovereigns of Asia, or the native princes of the country, who at all times made every order of their subjects, and all the property of the countries they governed, subservient to their policy or their extravagance. Mr Burke now reproached this geographical morality, or these claims to absolute power. He denied that the East India Company, or that the British government, had it to bestow. He asserted, that no such arbitrary government was attempted to be justified in the east: That every Mahometan government must be a government regulated by law, that is, by the laws of the Koran; and that the Gentoo laws proscribe every idea of arbitrary will in magistrates. He contended that the conduct of tyrants and usurpers, or the corrupt practices of mankind, were no principles upon which to regulate the duty of a British governor, who is bound to act, and ought to be judged by his country, upon British principles. These principles Mr Hastings was now accused of having violated, not merely in his own personal conduct, but by employing under him, persons whom he knew to be the most worthless of human beings, and for whose enormous cruelties he was responsible. These cruelties the accuser described with such warmth of colouring, that many of his hearers were convulsed with horror. Mr Burke concluded his speech, or rather his course of orations, with declaring, that with confidence he impeached Mr Hastings in the name of the commons of Great Britain, whose parliamentary trust he had betrayed, and whose national character he had dishonoured. That he impeached him in the name of the people of India, whose laws, rights, and liberties he had subverted, whose properties he had destroyed, and whose country he had made desolate. Lastly, he impeached him in the name of human nature, which he had cruelly outraged in both sexes, in every age, rank, and condition of life.

The managers of the impeachment next proposed, for regulating the future conduct of the impeachment, that they should proceed to a conclusion on both sides, upon each article separately, before they opened another; but the counsel for Mr Hastings insisted, that the house of commons should first proceed to a conclusion upon the whole charges, before any part of the defence should be demanded. The house of lords deliberated upon this point. The lord chancellor Thurlow and others, who usually voted with administration, supported the demand made by the counsel for Mr Hastings, while Lord Loughborough, and others in opposition, contended that it was impossible to do substantial justice in this way. The managers for the commons acquiesced in the decision, and thereafter entered upon the particular articles of charge. Two charges employed the house of lords during the remainder of the session; as it was necessary to occupy much time in hearing evidence upon each.

During the investigations occasioned by the trial of Mr Hastings, and the discussion of India affairs, the opposition party were led to bring forward an accusation against Sir Elijah Impey, the friend of Mr Hastings, and lately chief justice of the supreme court of Bengal. Soon after the commencement of the present session, Sir Gilbert Elliot presented to the house of commons six articles, containing charges against the late judge, of various high crimes and misdemeanours. The substance of these charges amounted to an assertion, that the chief justice had in a variety of instances rendered himself the agent and tool of Mr Hastings, particularly in the decision of a considerable number of important causes. On this occasion, Sir Gilbert Elliot addressed the house with much ability, in a speech of considerable length. He began by exculpating himself from the imputations which usually attach to the office of an accuser, that he is actuated by a natural malignity of temper, by personal resentments or interests, or by the spirit and passions of party.

With regard to the last, he stated that Sir Elijah Impey had been declared criminal, by the voice of parliament, before the parties into which it was at present divided, had any existence, and that the proceedings, out of which this accusation originated, had been carried on by persons of all descriptions and connexions, and were countenanced by every one of the administrations, which had succeeded each other during the last five years. He next congratulated the house, upon the proofs they had given, that the grievances of India were not only fit objects of their inquiries, but that their redress was the best object of their power. He adverted to certain principles, which for obvious ends had been industriously disseminated abroad, and had even been maintained in that house, that India was indeed oppressed, but that it was accustomed to oppression; and that it must be oppressed or abandoned. These scandalous positions Sir Gilbert warmly controverted, and laid down in opposition to them, what he thought nature and experience warranted him to affirm, that India must be redressed or lost.

Sir Gilbert Elliot then laid down a second principle; viz. that the only means left of reforming Indian abuse, was the punishment, in some great and signal instances, of Indian delinquency. This proposition he endeavoured to establish with great ingenuity, by comparing the different force and efficacy of laws, as arising from their penal sanctions, when applied in our own internal administration, and in the government of distant possessions. At home, where government had in sight, and was in contact with, the governed, their execution was easy and certain; but in our remote dominions, we had to labour with all the difficulties that absence, distance, and ignorance could oppose. Against this evil, no perfect remedy could be found, as experience had fully proved. Every resource of legislative regulation had been exhausted in vain: no device had been left untried, except the simple expedient of distributing reward to merit, and pains to guilt; the exemplary punishment of detected crimes was the only means left of convincing our distant subjects, that though distance might delay, it could not finally avert, the cognizance and penalties of justice.

Of the particular charges which Sir Gilbert Elliot brought forward against Sir Elijah Impey, that respecting the fate of the rajah Nundomar, a Hindoo prince of the sacred cast of the Bramins, was the most remarkable. He had the weakness, or imprudence, to become an informer or accuser, to the East India Company, against Britain against their principal servant, Mr Hastings; the consequence of which was, that the governor-general was alleged to have procured an accusation to be brought against him, in the court where Sir Elijah Impey presided; and there, on a charge of forgery, he was tried, condemned, and hanged, upon the authority of an English statute; whereby all complaints against the company's servants were said to be forever stifled, and the grievances of the east to have received a complete remedy. In the course of the session, witnesses were examined against Sir Elijah Impey. His defence was undertaken by the chancellor of the exchequer, with the solicitor and attorney-general. The first charge was rejected on the 9th of May, by a division of 73 against 55. On the 27th of May, the house voted a delay of procedure, during three months, and no impeachment resulted from the inquiry.

During the period which succeeded the prorogation of parliament, in the present year, the only occurrence worthy of notice arose out of the contests of the northern nations. At this period, the relative state of the European powers had rapidly undergone a most important alteration. During a century and a half, the power of the monarchy of France had been formidable to all Europe, and, at different periods, the most extensive combinations were found necessary to resist its ambition. That monarchy, however, since the close of the American war, had evidently lost its importance among the surrounding nations. Its influence over Holland had ever been one of its favourite objects of pursuit, but during the last year, it suffered that influence to be overturned, without a struggle; and with regard to every external effort, France, at this time, appeared to have fallen into a state of complete imbecility. The powers whose ambition was now dangerous to the repose of Europe, were Austria and Russia; the latter, in particular, was extremely restless and enterprising. The empress Catherine II. had contrived to engage in her views the emperor of Germany, Joseph II., and to prevail with him to engage in a fanguary war on the eastern frontiers of Europe, with a view to the partition of the provinces of the declining empire of the Turks; while France, the ancient ally of that power, was unable to give it any countenance or aid.

In the mean time, the same empress held in a state of extreme dependence upon herself, the two kingdoms, on her western boundary, Sweden and Denmark. After the fatal reign of Charles XII., by whose extravagant military enterprises, the strength of the kingdom had been exhausted, Sweden had sunk into a state of political weakness. The nobles in all parts of the country had refused, in a great degree, the independence of the feudal times, together with the anarchy to which that form of government was so remarkably subject. The crown and the people were equally insignificant, and the mutual animosities of the nobles subjected the state to the intrigues of neighbouring nations. The king of Prussia had remarked, that there was, in their diet, a French party, and a Russian party, but there was not an individual among them that supported the party of Sweden. The present monarch, Gustavus III., however, was now in the vigour of his age, and a man of a most enthusiastic and enterprising character. By attaching to himself the peantries of the country, and their deputies in their diet, he had, in 1772, obtained his power to be declared absolute; but the nobles had gradually recovered a portion of their authority, and, by the intrigues of Russia, they were now become very dangerous to the throne. These intrigues rendered the situation of the Swedish monarch extremely unhappy, and excited an impatient desire of shaking off his dependence upon Russia. He resolved, therefore, to take advantage of the present war, in which she had engaged with the Turks, to make an attack upon this mighty power, on its north-western frontier. To accomplish this object with tolerable safety, however, it was absolutely necessary that Sweden should be safe on the side of Denmark. But the court of Denmark having always governed Norway in a harsh unfeeling manner, it is said, that in the year 1772, Gustavus III. gave great countenance and encouragement to the malcontents of Norway. This last circumstance has been alleged, by the Danes, as an excuse for a treaty into which their government secretly entered at that time with Russia, whereby it was agreed, that, if Russia should be attacked, Denmark should assist her with 12,000 auxiliary troops, and six ships of the line.

But whatever may have been the conduct of the king of Sweden in 1772, there is no doubt that ever after that period he endeavoured, in the most anxious manner, to conciliate the good will of the court of Denmark. At the close of the year 1787, he paid an unexpected visit to the Danish court, at Copenhagen, in a manner totally destitute of all ceremony, and there endeavoured to prevail with the prince regent and his council, who governed the kingdom during the incapacity of the king, to enter into his views with regard to Russia. He pointed out in the strongest terms, the haughty spirit with which that ambitious power annoyed all her neighbours; that if her present design succeeded, of partitioning the Ottoman empire, her strength would become so vast, that Sweden and Denmark could afterwards only hope to submit as miserable dependants on her clemency. The court of Denmark, however, could not be prevailed upon to enter into these views, and appears still to have concealed its own secret engagements with Russia, or the part it meant to take in case of a war between Russia and Sweden.

In the month of July, the king of Sweden commenced offensive operations against Russia on the side between Finland. Here, however, the discontent which had been fostered by Russia among the Swedish nobles speedily came to view: Several officers declared, that the king had no right to make war without the consent of the states of the kingdom. The mutiny became general, and the troops refused to advance. When the king was in this embarrassed state, a Danish army suddenly advanced against Sweden under Prince Charles of Hesse Cassel, accompanied by the prince of Denmark, as a volunteer. To give this force the appearance of an auxiliary army, the prince of Hesse had been created a field marshal in the Russian service. The king of Sweden's affairs were now extremely desperate. The senate at Stockholm, during his absence, had assumed extraordinary powers, and had summoned a meeting of the states of the kingdom. The king, however, unexpectedly arrived at Stockholm from Finland, land, and put an end to their proceedings. He instantly sent off the whole regular troops from the capital; and having assembled the citizens, he declared, in a speech of great eloquence, that he intrusted to their fidelity the defence of his capital, and the protection of the queen and royal family. His audience were instantly seized with military enthusiasm; the citizens armed and embodied themselves, and performed the whole duty of the garrison. Such of the officers as had returned from the army in Finland, were insulted as traitors, and compelled to conceal themselves.

The king next hastened to the province of Dalecarlia, inhabited by a fierce and ignorant, but honest people, celebrated for the share which they took in the memorable revolution by which Gustavus Vasa refused his country from the despotic and unequalled cruelty of Denmark, which had massacred the citizens of Stockholm, and almost exterminated the nobility of the kingdom. The loyalty of these people was kindled to enthusiasm by this second visit of a king to their mines and forests, and 4000 of them instantly came forth as volunteers. In the mean time, the Danish army was advancing along the sea coast, which had been left undefended. A body of Swedes were taken prisoners, and the army advanced towards Gottenburg. The governor of this place, which is mostly built of timber, and therefore liable to instant destruction by bombardment, summoned a meeting of the inhabitants, and recommended submission to the invaders; to which they agreed. A Danish officer was, in the mean time, on his way to propose terms for capitulation. Thus was the rich mart and great emporium of the foreign commerce of Sweden, the only port of any value which the possession on the ocean, at the very point of being lost; nothing more being wanted to seal her destiny, than the arrival of the Danish officer to conclude the capitulation. By unusual personal exertion, however, the king, at this critical period, passed unnoticed through the enemies parties, and entered the city. He assembled the people, and having exerted his usual powers of persuasion, the inhabitants unanimously resolved to encounter every hazard in defense of the city. The place was thus saved for a moment; but its situation, as well as that of the king himself, was still extremely perilous. He had no adequate force within reach, wherewith to resist the Danish army; and the desperate obstinacy of his courage was such, that no body doubted his determination to perish in the ruins sooner than relinquish the place, while the native spirit of his subjects would scarcely permit those present to avoid becoming partakers of the ruin. On this occasion, however, the city and the king, and perhaps the monarchy of Sweden, owed their safety to the interference of a British subject.

It so happened that at this important period there was no titled ambassador in Sweden from any of the courts of London, Berlin, or Versailles. Their place, however, was well supplied by Mr Hugh Elliot, the British envoy at Copenhagen. This gentleman, from the first notice of hostilities, discerned the interests of his country and of Europe. He passed over into Sweden, and offered his welcome mediation to the king. He next threatened the Danes with an immediate invasion by a Prussian army, supported by a British and Dutch fleet. He continued his threats with such urgency and authority, that the Danish commander was intimidated, and delayed his threatened hostilities. A Prussian envoy soon arrived, and countenanced all the threats of Mr Elliot; the consequence of which was, that after much skilful negotiation, in which Mr Elliot was not a little perplexed by the impatient temper of the Swedish monarch, a suspension of hostilities was first concluded, and afterwards, in the month of November, the Danish troops totally evacuated the territory of Sweden.

Before taking our leave of foreign affairs for this Treaty year, it may be observed, that on the 25th of April, a new treaty of defensive alliance was concluded between Great Britain and the states general of the United Provinces, whereby his Britannic majesty guaranteed the hereditary fadholderhip in the house of Orange; and on the 13th of August, another treaty of defensive alliance was concluded with Prussia.

At the end of autumn of this year a domestic occurrence took place of a singular nature, and new in the annals of British history. The health of the sovereign had suffered a gradual decline; a circumstance that was not ascribed to the freedom of indulgence, and the softness of luxury, but, on the contrary, to too severe a regimen, too laborious exercise, too rigid abstinence, and too short intervals of rest. As a remedy for the symptoms that discovered themselves, the king determined to visit the medicinal waters of Cheltenham, and accordingly travelled into that part of the kingdom immediately after the prorogation of parliament, and did not return to the metropolis till the 18th of August. No benefit answerable to the expectations that had been formed resulted from this excursion. His health was in a precarious state, and on the 22d of October symptoms were observed by one of the royal physicians, of that alienation of mind which was afterwards the occasion of so many important and interesting transactions. For some time it was thought proper to observe as much secrecy as possible respecting the nature of the king's indisposition. The retreat of the sovereign at Windsor was favourable to this purpose; and for several days an opinion was entertained by the people in general, that his indisposition was a fever, and that it had risen to alarming a height as to threaten a speedy dissolution. The real nature of the case, however, could not long be suppressed. By the structure and practice of the English constitution almost every species of public business is, in some manner, implicated with the royal prerogatives. The administration of political government, in particular, was by the present event virtually suspended from its functions; and, notwithstanding the critical situation of Europe, and the very active share we had lately taken in its concerns, it was now deemed impracticable to return any sort of answer to the dispatches of foreign courts, or of our own ambassadors. In this situation the most natural expedient was to suffer the two houses of parliament, which stood prorogued to the 20th of November, to meet at that time, and either adjourn for a short interval, or immediately proceed to discuss the measures it would be proper to adopt at the present crisis. Circular letters were accordingly addressed to the members of the legislature on the 14th, signifying to them, that the indisposition of the sovereign rendered it doubtful whether there would be a possibility of receiving receiving his commands for the farther prorogation of parliament. In that case, the two houses must of necessity assemble, and the attendance of the different members was earnestly requested.

Parliament being assembled, the lord chancellor observed in the house of lords, that the reason of their being thus unusually called together without the ordinary notice, for the despatch of business, arose from the severity of the king's indisposition, which had rendered it impossible for him to approach the royal person in order to receive his commands. Lord Camden remarked, that the customary practice of giving 40 days' notice previously to the meeting of parliament, was not in his opinion absolutely necessary. There was an express act of parliament, that limited the notice, in case of treason or rebellion, to 14 days; he therefore recommended an adjournment for that term; and at the same time moved, that the chancellor, by order of the house, should address an official letter to every individual peer. Mr Pitt stated to the house of commons, that every authority had been consulted respecting the present singular situation of affairs; but they did not point out either the possibility of directing a new prorogation, or enable ministers to open the session of parliament in any regular way. Under these circumstances it would be highly improper for the house to proceed to the discussion of any public business; and it was absolutely necessary to adjourn. He therefore recommended the interval of a fortnight, when, if the king's illness should unhappily continue, it would be indispensably incumbent upon them to enter upon the immediate consideration of the state of public affairs. Mr Pitt farther moved a call of the house for the 4th of December, and that the speaker be directed to send circular letters, requiring the attendance of every member on that day.

The tenour of the precedents afforded by the history of England were regarded, upon the whole, as in favour of a protectorate or regency, under which the whole, or a considerable part of the political power, should be confided to the next heir to the crown, or to the adult of the royal family most nearly related to the king. A circumstance that rendered this consideration more material upon the present occasion was, that the prince of Wales was understood to entertain an avowed partiality for the political connexion that had lately been instrumental in obtaining for him the discharge of his debts, and an increase of his annual income, as well as some personal resentment to the ministers now in possession of office. Accordingly, soon after the indisposition of the king had been ascertained, the prince despatched an express to Mr Fox, who was at that time in Italy, requesting his immediate presence to assist him in forming an administration. The ministers were aware of the intentions of the prince of Wales, and wished, if possible, to keep themselves in office. As the duration of the king's illness was necessarily uncertain, and he might speedily be able to resume the government, it was obviously their interest to procrastinate, as much as possible, any new establishment which might be thought necessary on account of the present exigency. They were enabled to do so partly in consequence of the profound tranquillity enjoyed by the nation, which did not render the exercise of the executive power of such immediate necessity as in times of war or public alarm. It is impossible also to avoid remarking, upon this occasion, the effect of reputation in supporting any political measure. Mr Pitt, and his colleagues in office, were in possession of the public favour in a degree in which perhaps no ministers in the British annals ever enjoyed it for so long a period of time. Upon Mr Fox and his associates remained a part of that odium which the coalition and the India bill had originally excited. The prince of Wales himself was still less popular. The sobriety of his father's life was thought to form a contrast to his youthful indiscretions; and the rumour of his marriage with Mrs Fitzherbert was still propagated, and met with some credit. In this state of affairs the king's ministers, who had ceased to be anything more than a kind of ministers by courtesy, had every advantage from the countenance of the public in their project of delaying as long as possible the relinquishment of their official situations, by placing the exercise of the royal authority in new hands. On this occasion Mr Pitt conducted himself with great dexterity in contriving subjects of discussion in the house of commons, while his antagonists seem not to have been aware of his purpose, or, that while they were contending against him for victory, in debate upon speculative political questions, they were in fact fighting his battle, by delaying the period of their own entrance into power.

Upon the re-assembling of parliament, on the 4th of December, a report of the board of privy council, containing an examination of the royal physicians, was presented to the two houses by Lord Camden and Mr Pitt; and it was suggested, that when the delicacy of the subject, and the dignity of the person in question were considered, parliament would probably perceive the propriety of acting upon this report, rather than of demanding that more direct and ample information to which, in strictness, they were entitled. This suggestion was undoubtedly reasonable, as it could not readily be supposed that the ministers of the crown could possibly have acted so directly in opposition to their own interests, as to have falsely represented their matter as incapable of supporting them in their offices. Mr Fox, Mr Burke, and others, however, would not take their word upon this point, but insisted upon the solemnity of an inquiry by a committee of the two houses. The report of the committee was laid upon the table of the house of commons, on the 10th, when a farther proposition was moved by Mr Pitt, for the appointment of a committee to inquire into precedents of cases in which the personal exercise of the royal authority had been prevented or interrupted by infancy, sickness, infirmity, or any other cause. Mr Fox observed, that though he had no objection to the appointment of a committee for the purpose proposed, yet as it was notorious, that no precedent existed, which could be applied to the present case, he took this opportunity of stating the following general principle; that in consequence of its being ascertained, that the king right to the was at present incapable of holding the executive government, the prince of Wales had as clear and perfect a right to assume the reins and exercise the power of sovereignty during the continuance of the present incapacity, as if his father was actually dead. He added, however, that though the prince's right was per- fect and entire, the two houses of parliament, as the organs of the nation, were alone qualified to pronounce when he ought to take possession of his right. In reply to this remark, Mr Pitt said, he did not hesitate to affirm, that for any man to assert such a right in the prince of Wales, otherwise than as it was voluntarily conferred upon him by the two houses of parliament, was little less than treason to the constitution of his country; adding, that unless by their election, he had no more right, speaking of strict right, to assume the government than any other individual subject in England. He desired, that every man in that house, and every man in the nation, would consider, that on their proceedings depended, as well the existence of the constitution, as the interest and honour of a sovereign, who was deservedly the idol of his people.

On the following day, the opinion which had been stated by Mr Fox, was, in the house of lords, attacked by Lord Camden, and defended by Lord Loughborough and Lord Stormont. Ministers had now got an abstract question as a subject for debate, of which they resolved not to lose sight, especially as their side of the question was likely to prove most popular, being an assertion of the powers of parliament in opposition to an assertion of hereditary right. Mr Pitt accordingly, when the subject was next mentioned, said, that the question that had been started respecting the rights of parliament was of much greater magnitude and importance than those which related to the present exigency; and he hoped there would be an unanimous concurrence of opinion, that it was impossible to dismiss the question of right without its being fully discussed and decided. On the 16th of December, in a committee upon the state of the nation, he entered at large upon the subject, and endeavoured to prove, that, by ancient precedent, the powers vested in a regent had always been inferior to those of the king, and that parliament had interfered in cases of royal infancy in appointing councils of regency, or a single regent or protector. At the same time Mr Pitt admitted, that it would be expedient to intrust to the prince of Wales, whatever powers should be thought necessary. Mr Fox, on the contrary, contended, that his doctrine was supported by the very nature of a hereditary monarchy. He said, that upon Mr Pitt's principles, if a man were questioned, whether the monarchy is hereditary or not, the answer must be, "I cannot tell; ask his majesty's physicians. When the king of England is in health the monarchy is hereditary, but when he is ill and incapable of exercising the sovereign authority, it is then elective." Mr Fox ridiculed the subtlety of Mr Pitt's assertion, that the prince of Wales had no more right than he had, at the same time that he confessed that parliament was not at liberty to think of any other regent. Mr Pitt's motion upon the question of right was carried, upon a division of 268 against 204.

On the 22d of December, Mr Pitt proposed in the house of commons, a resolution, the object of which was, to declare, that it was necessary for the purpose of supplying the present defect, and maintaining the entire constitutional authority of the king, that the two houses should determine on the means by which the royal assent might be given to the bill, which they might adopt for constituting a regency. The object of this proposition was obvious; administration had resolved not to confide the regency to the prince of Wales unless under restrictions; but without the royal assent, an act of parliament, fixing these restrictions, could not be passed. They wished, therefore, to devise a solemnity which, in this case, should be held equivalent to the royal assent. Mr Pitt proposed, that the great seal should be affixed by the lord chancellor to the act of parliament, and that this should be held equivalent to the royal assent. Mr Fox, on the contrary, pressed an immediate address to the prince of Wales to take upon himself the regency. Long debates occurred upon the point in both houses of parliament, in which administration continued to be supported by the majority.

On the 2d of January 1789, a new cause of delay occurred in consequence of the death of Mr Cornwallis, the speaker of the house of commons. Mr Grenville was elected, in opposition to Sir Gilbert Elliot, upon a division of 215 against 144. On the 6th of January, when the house of commons were about to consider Mr Pitt's proposed regency bill, Mr Loveden moved for the appointment of a new committee to inquire into the state of the king's health. The proposal, after a debate, was carried by administration.

In the mean while Mr Pitt, in the name of the rest of the cabinet, explained to the prince of Wales, prince's in a letter, the restrictions which were meant to be inserted in the regency bill. These were, that the administration of the king's person, and the disposition of his household, should be committed to the queen; and that the power to be exercised by the prince should not extend to the personal property of his father; to the granting any office, reversion, or pension, except where the law absolutely required it, as in the case of the judges, for any other term than during the king's pleasure; nor to the conferring any peerage, unless upon such persons of the royal issue as should have attained the age of 21 years. Mr Pitt added, that the ideas he had suggested were founded upon the supposition, that the royal malady was only temporary, and might be of short duration. It would be difficult to fix at present the precise period for which these provisions ought to endure; but it would be open hereafter to the wisdom of parliament to reconsider them whenever circumstances might appear to render it eligible. In his answer, which was dated on the 2d of January 1789, the prince declared, that it was with deep regret he perceived, in the propositions of administration, a project for introducing weakness, disorder, and insecurity, into every branch of political business; a project for dividing the royal family from each other, for separating the court from the state, and depriving government of its natural and accustomed support; a scheme for disconnecting the authority to command service from the power of animating it by reward, and for allotting to him all the invidious duties of the kingly station, without the means of softening them to the public by any act of grace, favour, or benignity. He stated it to be a principle of the British constitution, that the powers and prerogatives of the crown were held as a trust for the benefit of the people, and were sacred, as they conducted to preserve that balance of the constitution, which was the true security of the liberty of the subject; and he objected to making making trial, in his person, of an experiment to ascertain with how small a portion of kingly power the executive government of the country could be conducted. He asserted his conviction, that no event could be more repugnant to the feelings of his royal father on his recovery, than to know that the government of his son and representative had exhibited the sovereign power in a state of degradation and diminished energy, a state injurious in its practice to the prosperity of the people, and mischievous in its precedent to the security of the monarch and the rights of his family. The prince declared himself resolved, however, to undertake, under every disadvantage, the office of regent, to avoid the evils which might otherwise arise.

We may here remark, that the most singular part of the project for the government of the kingdom appears to have been, that for confiding to the queen the power to remove, nominate, and appoint the officers of the royal household; assisted by a permanent council, to be selected by parliament, and to consist, in some measure, of the members of the present administration. The annual income of the royal household was computed to amount to 300,000l. and the number of officers of which it consisted to 400, an influence, that would certainly have been sufficiently formidable to a government in other respects restricted and limited. The lords of the bed-chamber had been made use of to defeat Mr Fox's projected India bill, and might, under a separate establishment, have proved embarrassing to the existing government. It may also be remarked, that during the whole of the present reign, the queen had never previously appeared to act beyond her domestic sphere, a circumstance which tended not a little to increase the personal respectability of her husband, as his conjugal fidelity and attachment had always been remarkable. In consequence, however, of her name being obtained at this time to the ministerial project, an idea came to be very generally entertained, that her influence or interference in political transactions was by no means inconsiderable.

It is worthy of remark, that on this occasion administration were, no doubt, greatly encouraged in their pursuit of the plan they had formed for restricting the prince's power, by the addresses that were presented to them from various parts of the kingdom, expressive of the gratitude of the persons by whom they were sent, for the assertion which had been made by the house of commons of their right of providing for the present deficiency.

On the 16th of January, Mr Pitt proposed his regency bill, retailing it, in some measure, upon the decisive opinion of Dr Willis, who expressed great hopes of the king's recovery. After long debates, the limitations were supported by a considerable majority. In the house of lords, similar debates occurred, but there also administration were victorious.

On the 31st of January, Lord Camden moved in the house of lords, that the lord-chancellor be directed, by authority of the two houses of parliament, to issue a commission in the name of the sovereign, for the purpose of immediately opening the session of parliament. The resolution was carried, the house of commons concurred in it, and the session was opened in the proposed form, on the 3d of February.

Though the principles of the regency bill had been previously discussed, yet its various clauses gave rise to new debates and votes, in which administration still maintained their superiority. The last clause provided, that when it should appear to the queen, and the majority of her council, that the king was restored to health, they should be authorized to signify it under their hands to the lord president of the privy-council, who should cause it to be recorded in full council, and having so done, should send a copy of it to the lord mayor of London, and cause it to be printed in the gazette. The king was then authorized to summon nine privy counsellors, not members of the council to the queen, by the advice of any six of whom, he should be authorized to issue a proclamation, countersigned by the five privy-counsellors, declaring his intention to resume the regal functions, and upon these formalities, the functions of the regent should immediately cease.

It was farther provided, that, after this proclamation, parliament should forthwith assemble for the transaction of business. The bill passed the house of commons on Regency the 12th of Feb. and was presented to the house of lords bill passes on the following day. It was discussed on the 17th and the 18th, and a few amendments were introduced into it.

Here, however, the whole of these proceedings terminated. On the 12th of February, the king had been declared by his physicians to be in a state of progress. An adjournment of the house of lords was therefore proposed on the 19th. On the 25th, the session of the king was declared by his physicians free from complaint, and on the 10th of March, the lord-chancellor, by the king's authority, addressed both houses of parliament in a speech, and the ordinary business of the session commenced. The experiment was thus left untried, of the effects which the diminished authority of a regent might have produced, at the period in question, upon the practice of the British government.

In the meanwhile, the administration of Mr Pitt had been less fortunate in the kingdom of Ireland than in his own country. The unexampled popularity that reconciled the people of Great Britain to all his measures, regency and the odium and suspicion that had fallen upon his opponents, had not hitherto, in any very eminent degree, communicated themselves to the neighbouring island. The prospect of his departure, from office, therefore, in that country, excited little regret, and its parliament made haste to worship what they accounted the rising sun. It had stood adjourned, previous to the royal incapacity, to the 20th January 1789, and the marquis of Buckingham, then lord-lieutenant, with consent of the privy-council of Ireland, ventured to defer its meeting to the 5th of Feb. On the 11th of that month, two motions were offered to the consideration of the house of commons. The first of them by Mr Grattan, the member most distinguished for his talents; and the second by Mr Conolly, the richest of the Irish commoners. By the first, the royal incapacity was declared; and by the second, it was proposed to present an address to the prince of Wales, requesting him to take upon himself the government, with its various powers, jurisdictions, and prerogatives. In support of these motions, it was argued by Mr Grattan, that there were two modes of proceeding, familiar to the several branches of the legislature; the one legislation, and the other address. The former of these proceeded upon the supposition of a third estate, and required the concurrence of that estate, in order to give it validity; the latter was a function, exclusively the property of the the two houses, and which was in itself complete and final. The plan he recommended, advised the creation of a third estate, in order to legislate; not the legislating, in order to create a third estate. To fill up the existing deficiency, was the only act the situation made indispensable. Limiting, therefore, their operation to the demand of the necessity, they parted with their extraordinary power, the very moment it was brought completely into exercise. This Mr Grattan considered as the first thing necessary to be done; but as the addresses of parliament, though competent to supply the deficiency, did not, and could not with propriety, annex to their act the forms of law, he thought it advisable, after the acceptance of the regency, that there should be an act passed, for the purpose of recognizing and giving the established form, to the measures which had preceded. The powers he recommended to be conferred upon the regent, were precisely those exercised by the king; and the reason of this, he said, was to be found in the very nature of the prerogative, which was given, not for the sake of the king, but of the people, for whose use, both kings, and regents, and prerogatives, were created and constituted. He knew of no political reason, why the prerogatives in question should be destroyed, nor any personal reason why they should be suspended. He thought it unnecessary, to copy minutely the proceedings of England. The two nations concurred in the same general object, the choice of a regent, which was a common concern, the particular modification of which must be governed by the particular circumstances of the different countries.

The attorney-general, Mr Fitzgibbon, was the principal champion of administration. He contended, that the Irish parliament ought to wait, till the prince of Wales was invested with the authority of regent in England. He would then have the command of the great seal of that country, the affixing of which was requisite to give authenticity to every legislative act in Ireland. Upon this last solemnity he laid great stress; asserting that the moment a regent was appointed for Great Britain, supposing him to be a different person from the Irish regent, he might send a commission under the great seal of England, appointing a lord lieutenant of Ireland; and to that commission, their regent, at the peril of his head, would be obliged to pay obedience. He asserted, that the government of Ireland, under its present constitution, could never go on, unless they followed Great Britain implicitly in all regulations of imperial policy. Mr Fitzgibbon predicted, that the unadvised rashness of those who disregarded this rule, must ultimately lead to a legislative union with England, a measure which he deprecated, but which was more surely prepared by such violence, than if all the juices of corruption were prepared together, and poured in one overwhelming torrent upon the country's representatives.

Mr Hutchinson, the secretary of state, who at this time joined opposition, contended, that the regent of England could not, as such, give the royal assent to an Irish bill, and Mr Curran enlarged upon the evils which attended elective monarchy. He contended, that, without overturning the constitution, neither Britain nor Ireland could exert any choice upon the subject, but must receive into the royal office the heir of the monarchy.

The propositions of Mr Grattan and Mr Conolly were voted by the majority; and on the following day, an address to the prince of Wales was also voted, and sent to the house of lords for their concurrence. It was adopted by the house of lords by a great majority. The address was carried to the lord-lieutenant on the 19th of February, who, however, refused to transmit it to England; upon which, the two houses appointed six commissioners, to present the address immediately to the prince. These measures, however, were scarcely carried through parliament, when the king's recovery rendered them ineffectual; the consequence of which was, that the majority of the Irish parliament, who were very far from having intended to engage in a contest with the British government, found themselves in an awkward situation. They maintained for a short time an appearance of firmness; but as the British administration avoided displaying any resentment, on account of the part they had acted, the legislature of that country speedily resumed its usual character of obsequiousness to the British government.

The subject of the slave trade, which had been suggested to the consideration of parliament during the preceding session, was not regularly resumed till the 12th of May. In the interval, various petitions had been presented against the abolition of the trade, by persons interested in it, in London, Liverpool, Bristol, and other places. The report of the committee of privy council, of which Mr Pitt had given notice during the preceding session, was in the meantime presented to the house of commons; and it is to be remarked, that, during the preceding year, the enemies of the trade had been extremely active throughout the country, in endeavouring to excite the general indignation of the public against this odious traffic. Innumerable pamphlets were distributed, either gratuitously, or at a low price, giving an account of the calamities endured by the unhappy natives of Africa, in consequence of it. The wars, in which their petty princes were tempted to engage, with a view to the capture of prisoners, whom they might sell to European traders, were fully explained; the wretched manner in which these slaves were transported to the West India colonies, fettered and crowded together in such a way, as to occasion the destruction of multitudes of them by disease, was represented by prints, which were distributed along with the popular publications upon the subject; and, lastly, instances of the cruelty of the masters in the West Indies were published, which had a tendency to render the whole white inhabitants there extremely odious. In consequence of all these exertions, the public at large were induced to interest themselves with very great zeal, for the purpose of procuring, if not an abolition of the state of slavery which exists in the West India islands, at least a complete prohibition of the importation of additional slaves from Africa. To this last object, the abolition of the trade for slaves to the coast of Africa, the attention of the legislature was at this time confined.

Mr Wilberforce opened the business, by stating the effects of the trade upon Africa, as forming the principal motives of the wars in that country. He next noticed the mode of transportation, the most wretched slave-trade part of the whole subject, in which, he said, so much misery, condensed in so little room, was more than the human imagination had ever before conceived. Different different accounts of this matter were indeed given, he said, by witnesses, according to their prejudices and interests; but he observed, that death was a witness that could not deceive, and the proportion of deaths would not only confirm, but, if possible, even aggravate our suspicion of the misery of the transit. It would be found, upon an average of all the ships upon which evidence had been given, that, exclusive of such as perished before they sailed, not less than $12\frac{1}{2}$ per cent. died in the passage. Besides these, the Jamaica report stated, that four and a half per cent. expired upon shore before the day of sale, which was only a week or two from the time of their landing; one-third more died in the seasoning; and this, in a climate exactly similar to their own, and where, as some of the witnesses pretended, they were healthy and happy. The diseases, however, that they contracted on shipboard, the afflicting and wastes that were employed to hide their wounds, and make them up, as it was called, for sale, were a principal cause of this mortality. The negroes, it should be remembered, were not purchased at first, except in perfect health; and the sum of the different casualties, taken together, produced a mortality of above 50 per cent. Mr Wilberforce added, that, as soon as he had advanced thus far in his investigation, he felt the wickedness of the slave-trade to be so enormous, so dreadful, and irremediable, that he could stop at no alternative short of its abolition. A trade founded on iniquity, and carried on with such circumstances of horror, must be abolished, let the policy be what it might; and he had from this time determined, whatever were the consequences, that he would never rest till he had effected that abolition. The principle upon which he founded the necessity of the abolition, was not policy, but justice: but though justice were the principle of the measure, yet he trusted, he should distinctly prove it to be reconcileable with our truest political interest. In the first place, he asserted, that the number of negroes in the West Indies might be kept up without the introduction of recruits from Africa; and, to prove this, he enumerated the various sources of the present mortality. The first was, the disproportion of the sexes, an evil, which, when the slave-trade was abolished, must, in the course of nature, cure itself. The second was, the disorders contracted in the transportation, and the consequences of the wastes and mercurial ointments, by which they were made up for sale. A third was excessive labour joined with improper food; and a fourth, the extreme dissoluteness of their manners. These would all of them be counteracted by the impossibility of procuring further supplies. It was the interest, they were told, of the masters to treat their slaves with kindness and humanity: but it was immediate and present, not future and distant interest, that was the great spring of action in the affairs of mankind.

Mr Wilberforce moved twelve propositions, upon which, however, he observed, that he did not mean to urge them to an immediate vote. They stated the number of slaves annually carried from Africa, imported into the British West Indies, and entered in the customhouse accounts; the number in the first of these articles amounting to 38,000. They entered into the probable demerits of the persons sold to slavery; the consequences produced upon the inhabitants of Africa, and the valuable and important commerce to that country which might be substituted in the room of the slave-trade. They stated the injury sustained by the British seamen, and the fatal circumstances that attended the transportation to the slaves. They detailed the causes of the mortality of the negroes, and enumerated the different items of calculation respecting the increase of population in Jamaica and Barbadoes; and they concluded with declaring, that it appeared that no considerable or permanent inconvenience would result from discontinuing the farther importation.

Upon this occasion, Mr Pitt supported that side of Mr Pitt, the question which had previously received, in a very &c., op-remarkable degree, the sanction of popular applause. He declared himself satisfied, that no argument, compatible with any idea of justice, could be assigned for the continuation of the slave-trade. He trusted, that the project now recommended, would not prove the means of inviting foreign powers to supply our islands by a clandestine trade. Should such an illicit proceeding be attempted, the only language which it became us to adopt was, that Great Britain had resources to enable her to protect her islands, and to prevent that trade from being clandestinely carried on with them, which she had thought fit, from a regard to her character and her honour, to abandon. It was highly becoming in Great Britain to take the lead of all other countries in a business of so great magnitude; and he could not but have confidence that foreign nations would be inclined to share the honour, and contented to follow us as their patterns in so excellent a work. Mr Fox highly approved of what Mr Pitt had said respecting the language it became us to hold to foreign powers. A trade in human flesh he considered as so scandalous, that it was in the last degree infamous to suffer it to be openly carried on by the authority of the government of any country. A regulation of the trade had been proposed by some persons; but his detestation of its existence led him, he said, naturally to remark, that he knew of no such thing as a regulation of robbery and restriction of murder. There was no medium. The legislature must either abolish the trade, or plead guilty to all the iniquity with which it was attended. Mr Burke observed, that, whatever were the present situation of Africa, it could never be meliorated under the present system. While we continued to purchase the natives, they must for ever remain in a state of savage barbarity. It was impossible to civilize a slave; it was contrary to the system of human nature. There was no country that continued under such disadvantageous circumstances, into which the shadow of improvement had ever been introduced.

On the other hand, Mr Wilberforce's propositions met with considerable opposition. Mr Savage and Mr Newnham, on the part of the city of London, said, that the measure, if carried into effect, would render the metropolis one scene of bankruptcy. Mr Dempster said, that Mr Wilberforce's first proposal ought to be, to make good out of the public purse, the losses which individuals would sustain from the abolition of the trade. Lord Penrhyn asserted, that there were mortgages in the West India islands, to the amount of 70 millions sterling; and that Mr Wilberforce's project would bind the country in equity, for the repayment of this sum. Mr Henniker opposed the the abolition, on account of the unalterable depravity of the Africans, which rendered them incapable of being civilized. And the same side of the question was farther supported, upon various grounds, by Lord Maitland, Mr Maribam, Mr Haffey, Mr Rolle, Mr Drake, and Mr Alderman Watson. The merchants who opposed the abolition, requested leave to examine witnesses on their side of the question. Mr Pitt observed, that, in his opinion, all farther inquiry was unnecessary, and could only tend to waste the time of the house. Afterwards, however, he appeared to relax in this respect, and the examination of witnesses was permitted, which consumed so much time, that the business could not be brought to a conclusion during the session. The transactions of the house under this head, were concluded by the renewal of Sir William Dolben's act, to regulate, for a limited time, the mode of conveying slaves in British vessels from the coast of Africa.

The annual business of the budget was not brought forward, in the present year, till the 16th of June; and immediately previous to this discussion, the office of speaker of the house of commons was vacated, by the promotion of Mr Grenville to the situation of one of the principal secretaries of state, on the resignation of Lord Sydney. Upon this occasion, the marquis of Graham and Mr Grosvenor moved, that Mr Henry Addington, who was the personal friend of Mr Pitt, and the son of Dr Stephen Addington, physician to Mr Pitt's family, should be appointed to the chair. The name of Sir Gilbert Elliot was proposed on the part of opposition, by the same persons who had brought it forward upon a former occasion; and Mr Fox and Mr Burke, in support of this amendment, took notice of the youth and inexperience of his competitor. At length the house divided, and the numbers appeared in favour of Mr Addington 215, and of Sir Gilbert Elliot 142.

In consequence of the expense incurred by the late armament, the allowance to the American loyalists, and other circumstances, it was found necessary to have recourse to a loan of one million, to defray the interest of which, additional taxes were imposed upon newspapers, advertisements, cards and dice, probates of wills, legacies to collateral relations, and carriages and horses.

As one of Mr Pitt's modes of extending the revenue consisted of exerting great vigilance in the suppression of smuggling, he had formerly transferred the management of the revenue upon wine from the customs to the board of excise. He now extended the same plan to the article tobacco. He opened the subject in the house of commons on the 16th of June, by observing, that tobacco was now to be considered as the smuggler's staple, in the same manner as he had formerly dealt in tea, wine, and spirits. The quantity of tobacco consumed in this kingdom, was found to bear a tolerably near proportion to the quantity of tea, and at least one-half of this quantity was the exclusive commodity of the smuggler. The consumption amounted to 14 millions of pounds, and the loss to the revenue, upon the half of this consumption, was three or four hundred thousand pounds per annum. Under these circumstances, Mr Pitt thought it necessary to have recourse to the system of excise, by which the stock of the dealer is taxed instead of the duty being collected on importation. He supported his proposal, by alluding to the success of the same measure, in increasing the revenue upon wine.

As the excise laws authorize the revenue officers to search the houses of the dealers, and as they supersede the favourite system of administering justice by a trial by jury, their extension had formerly been extremely unpopular, and had nearly occasioned the ruin of different ministers, by whom it had been attempted; but, in consequence of the popularity of Mr Pitt's administration, or in consequence of the long enjoyment of national prosperity under the reigning family, without any very remarkable political struggles, Mr Pitt's projects for the purpose of extending the excise, if not positively approved, were, at least contemplated with indifference. Petitions were, however, presented against the proposed alteration by the persons about to fall under the new system, and they were permitted to be heard by counsel. They asserted, that the introduction of the excise would lead to the disclosure of their art, and to the consequent ruin of their manufacture; and, that the operations of excise, such as gauging and weighing, were inapplicable to their commodity. Mr Fox, who was absent during the first stages of the business, afterwards came forward. When the bill was under the consideration of a committee, he declared, that he had come down to the subject, the house, not so much from any hope of successfully opposing the bill, as with a view to enter his general protest against a scheme which he completely disapproved. He had opposed, and would oppose, every extension of the excise laws, because he was convinced they were a system of laws under which no freeman ought to live, and were utterly incompatible with the principles of just and equal government. He was aware, that, in some men, any new increase of revenue outweighed every other consideration. His own opinion was different, and if the excise on tobacco would produce half a million a-year, he would still oppose it. It was the infringement of our liberties and constitution, hitherto regarded as ineffinable, that he resented, and which he foresaw would fall a sacrifice to considerations of revenue. He remarked, that the measure seemed little to interest the public in general; and, if parliament would not attend to their duty, and the nation abandoned it, he saw no prospect of stemming the tide. It seemed as if liberty and a free constitution were merely talked of, and not felt; as if they were words only fit to decorate a speech in parliament; a beautiful theory, but no longer compatible with practice or fit for enjoyment. Standing as we did, the first country for literature, for science, and all which could improve and adorn mankind, it must mortify every man who admired the freedom of our constitution and the equity of our laws, that the sources of our eminence should be so completely and irretrievably forgotten. On the contrary, Mr Grenville remarked, that, by the excise laws, six millions of annual revenue were collected; that these laws had been promoted in the best periods of our history; that only 3000 more people were now proposed to be put under them; that the constitution had not hitherto been injured by these laws, and that their extension was absolutely necessary, to enable the honest trader, in the article in question, to carry on his business with success. The bill was carried by a large majority. met with similar resistance in the house of lords from Lord Stormont, but with a similar issue.

Mr Fox had annually brought forward a motion for the repeal of the shop-tax, which had proved extremely unpopular in the capital. During the present session, Mr Pitt confessed that the tax should be abolished. Mr Beaufoy again introduced a motion for the repeal of the corporation and test acts. It was supported by Mr Fox, but opposed by Lord North and Mr Pitt, and rejected by a division of 122 against 102.

A bill was introduced into the house of lords by Earl Stanhope, for relieving the members of the church of England from various penalties and disabilities under which they laboured, and for extending freedom in matters of religion to persons of all denominations, Papists excepted. The laws it chiefly intended to repeal, were laws imposing penalties upon persons who did not frequent the established worship, and prohibiting men from speaking or writing in derogation of the doctrine of the book of Common Prayer. It also repealed the laws enjoining the eating fish on certain days, authorizing the imprisonment of persons excommunicated, prohibiting the exportation of women, and declaring all persons who should go to court, without having previously made a certain declaration, which probably had been made by no person now living, to be in the eye of the law Popish recusant convicts, which was a species of outlawry. Lord Stanhope also mentioned certain canons, of which, however, he did not propose the repeal, because he conceived them to be at present void of the force of law. By these canons, among other things, it was declared, that a person who should bring against another a charge of impiety, should not be allowed to be complained against, as having acted out of malice, or from any other motive than from the discharge of his conscience; and that no clergyman should, without license from the bishop, attempt, upon any pretence whatsoever, to cast out any devil or devils. Lord Stanhope deprecated the objection, that the laws he wished to repeal were obsolete, and never carried into execution; and undertook to produce above 30 cases within the last 26 years, some of them within 10, and some within one year, in which men had been persecuted under these laws; and, in some instances, the tables, chairs, dishes, and beds, of poor people, had been sold by public auction to pay the penalties of not going to church. Lord Stanhope's bill was opposed by Dr Moore, archbishop of Canterbury, who insisted, that if a man were unfortunate enough to disbelieve the existence of a God, he ought not to be at liberty to disseminate so dangerous a doctrine. Dr Warren, bishop of Bangor, and Dr Halifax, bishop of St Asaph, observed, that Lord Stanhope was mistaken in imagining, that the canons to which he alluded had not the force of law, and asserted, that the clergy were still bound by them, though the laity were exempted. These bishops opposed all innovations upon such a subject as dangerous. Dr Horley, bishop of St David's, admitted that some of the old laws alluded to ought to be repealed; but he objected to Lord Stanhope's bill, as rudely tearing away the foundation of the church of England, and thereby weakening the English constitution. The bill was rejected; and the same nobleman immediately produced another bill, to prevent suits for the recovery of tithes from being instituted in the ecclesiastical courts, whose proceedings, he alleged, were severe, especially against Quakers, who, by their religious principles, were restrained from the voluntary payment of tithes. This bill also was rejected.

On the first of July, the East India Company petitioned the house of commons for permission to add an additional sum of one million to their capital, the capital in whole to be subscribed by the present proprietors of East India stock. The request was granted with little difficulty. On the same day, Mr Dundas, as minister for India, or president of the board of control, brought forward a statement of the revenues of India, which, after every article of expenditure in that country was deducted, he calculated at 1,820,000l. Mr Francis objected to some particulars of the statement, and Major Scott, the friend and supporter of Mr Haftings, took this opportunity of remarking, that when now, for the first time, an India budget had been opened, Mr Francis had omitted to say one word as to the state of the government of that country, or to reprobate, as he had been accustomed to do, the system under which it was administered. That system he affirmed to be the same which had been introduced by Mr Haftings, adopted by Lord Cornwallis, and sanctioned by the king's ministers. Thus the house of commons appeared, as he observed, to be alternately engaged in condemning and reprobating the system when they acted in one capacity, and bestowing upon it the highest applause when they acted in another.

During the present session, the trial of Mr Hastings still went on before the house of lords. The third charge brought forward, respecting presents received by Mr Hastings during his government of Bengal, was opened by Mr Burke. In the course of his speech upon this occasion, Mr Burke alluded to the trial and execution of Nundcomar, and asserted that Mr Haftings had murdered that man by the hands of Sir Elijah Impey. The transaction respecting Nundcomar made no specific part of the charges which had been made against Mr Haftings by the house of commons; and the question, so far as Sir Elijah was implicated in it, had been examined and rejected during the preceding session. Mr Haftings, therefore, thought proper to present a petition to the house, in which he entreated them, either to cause the additional allegations that were urged against him to be brought forward, and prosecuted in specific articles, or to afford him such other redress as they might judge suitable and proper. In his petition he mentioned certain other accusations that had been brought against him in the course of the trial, which were not specified in the articles of impeachment. Mr Pitt supported the petition; asserting, that the murder of Nundcomar was no part of the crime of peculation, and every rule of evidence was against its being alleged. It had been charged in order to discredit the character of the accused; but it was a rule in the courts of law, that no fact could be given in evidence to discredit even a witness. If then the murder of Nundcomar was not admissible as evidence, it could only be urged as matter of aggravation; but it was impossible to allow this. The common sense of the house, and of all mankind, would not permit the crime of murder to be urged to aggravate a crime of peculation. Mr Fox, on the contrary, quoted the case of a captain of of a ship, against whom murder was charged in having thrown his cargo of flaves overboard, in order to prove that he had by finifter means endeavoured to defraud the underwriters of the amount of the infrance. The present case, Mr Fox said, was exactly correspondent to this. It was impossible to relate the corrupt transactions of Mr Hastings, without relating the crimes that had accompanied them, or to relate the crimes without mentioning the names of the persons by whom they had been committed. A resolution, however, was moved by the marquis of Graham, one of the lords of the treasury, and carried, by which it was declared, that no authority had been given by the house of commons, for making any allegation against Mr Hastings, respecting the death of Nundcomar; and that the words of Mr Burke, complained of in the petition, ought not to have been spoken.

The session of parliament was concluded on the 11th of August, by a speech delivered by the lord-chancellor, in the name of the king. The summer passed away in Great Britain, without producing any memorable event, and parliament assembled again on the 17th of January 1790. They were met by the king in person, who, in his speech from the throne, remarked, that he had received continued assurances of pacific dispositions, from the different powers in Europe, and congratulated the nation on the happiness it enjoyed, from the increasing advantages of peace.

During the preceding summer, the eventful career of the French revolution had commenced. To remedy the state of extreme weakness, into which the government of France had fallen, in consequence of the public debts, and the embarrassment of the finances, the king had called together the states of the kingdom, who had assumed the title of the national assembly. Their debates, which were held in public, diffused extensively a love of innovation, for the purpose of reforming their ancient government, and establishing a free constitution. When the court became alarmed by the violence of their proceedings, and attempted to set bounds to their projects, the populace of the capital rose in arms, and the military refused to act against them. The national assembly proceeded in the daily discussion of new plans of change. They seized the ecclesiastical property and tithes, resolving to limit the clergy for the future to stated salaries. They put an end to the monastic institutions. They abolished the whole order of nobility, and limited the power of the crown. These, and other proceedings, which we shall state in their proper place, could not fail to excite attention in Britain, and accordingly allusions to them became not unfrequent in the British parliament during the present session, and general questions were debated with more animation, and excited a higher degree of interest, than they had done during many years.

The supplies for the navy and army, having been stated to the house of commons at the same amount as in the preceding session; this circumstance produced, with regard to the army, some animadversions from Mr Marlborough and Mr Pulteney, who alleged, that from the state of Europe, our military establishment might safely be reduced. Mr Fox observed, that if ever there could be a moment, in which he could be less jealous than usual of an increase of the army, the present was that precise moment. The example of a neighbouring nation had proved, that the former imputations upon standing armies were unfounded and calumnious, and it was now universally known through all Europe, that a man, by becoming a soldier, did not cease to be a citizen. He thought the new form the government of France was likely to assume, would render her a better neighbour, than when she was subject to the intrigues of ambitious and interested statesmen. Mr Pitt acknowledged, that the tumultuous situation of France afforded a prospect of tranquillity; but he thought, that the opportunity ought to be seized, to raise our army into such a state of respectability, as would leave no hopes to future hostility. The present convulsions of France, he observed, must sooner or later terminate in general harmony and regular order; but Mr Pitt confessed there was a probability, that while the proofs of fortunate arrangements of such a situation might render her more formidable, they would also convert her into a less restless neighbour. He hoped, he should do nothing wrong as an Englishman, while, as a man, he wished the restoration of the tranquillity of France, though that event appeared to him considerably distant. Whenever it arrived, and her inhabitants became truly free, they must be in possession of a freedom, resulting from order and good government; they would then stand forward as one of the most brilliant powers in Europe, nor could he regard with envious eyes, an approximation towards those sentiments which were characteristic of every British subject. While Mr Pitt, who had commenced his own political career as the champion of political reform, and who, notwithstanding his official situation, had, upon important occasions, represented himself as not relinquishing his attachment to his first popular notions, was thus applauding the first revolutionary movements of the French; his friends accounted themselves at liberty to adopt sentiments of a different nature, upon the same subject. Vilcourt Valletort, who had moved the address to the king on the first day of the session, expressed great compassion on account of the unhappy state of the king of France, almost a prisoner in his own palace, and of the families of distinction who had found it necessary to fly to foreign countries, to avoid the unexampled barbarities which were committed with impunity at home. Colonel Phipps asserted, that the praise bestowed by Mr Fox, upon the conduct of the French military, was a poor compliment to the profession in general, and that if he had wanted a subject for panegyric, he ought rather to have adverted to the conduct of the English army, during the riots of 1780, when they were led by false feelings to put themselves at the head of schemes of anarchy and cruelty.

On the 9th of February, when the vote of supply for the army came a second time under consideration, hostile to Mr Burke revived the subject of the French revolution. He declared himself, in decided terms, an enemy to the measures that had lately taken place in that country. He conceived it would be the greatest of all calamities for Britain, if any set of men among us should represent the late transactions in France as a fit object for our imitation. On account of the weaknesses of France, however, he condemned the greatness of our military establishment. He declared, that on looking over the geography of this quarter of the world, he saw a great gap, a vast blank, the space hither- France, he said, had at different periods been as dangerous to us by her example, as by her hostility. In the last age, we had been in danger of being entangled, by her example, in the net of a relentless despotism. Our present danger, from the model of a people, whose character knew no medium, was that of being led, through an admiration of successful fraud and violence, to imitate the excesses of an irrational, unprincipled, profligating, confiscating, plundering, ferocious, bloody, and tyrannical democracy. They had a good political constitution the day their states general assembled in separate orders; but this they had destroyed. They had now no other system, than a determination to destroy all order, subvert all arrangement, and reduce every description of men to one level. He was sorry, that a proceeding like this should be compared to the revolution in England, which neither impaired the monarchy nor the church; but merely drove away a legal monarch, who was attempting arbitrary power.

Mr Fox expressed great concern on account of his differing in opinion from Mr Burke, for whom he avowed the highest reverence and esteem. He repeated his former opinion on the subject of French affairs, but declared himself an enemy of all absolute forms of government, whether monarchy, aristocracy, or democracy. Mr Sheridan, in more unqualified terms, stated his approbation of Mr Burke's sentiments. He expressed his surprise, that any man who valued the British government, should feel such abhorrence of the patriotic proceedings in France. He declared himself as ready as Mr Burke to detest the cruelties which had been committed; but what, said he, is the striking lesson, the awful moral, that these outrages teach? A deeper abhorrence of that system of despotic government, that had so deformed and corrupted human nature, and that by its extortions, dungeons, and torture, prepared beforehand a day of languinary vengeance, when the irritated populace should possess themselves of power. He complimented individually, the Marquis de la Fayette, M. Bailly, and others of the French patriots. He avowed the hope, that the despotism of France would never be restored; but observed, that he ought not, on that account, to be considered as approving a wanton persecution of the nobility, or an insult upon royalty. Mr Burke answered Mr Sheridan with indignation. He denied that he was the advocate of despotism, but said that Mr Sheridan had sacrificed his friendship for the applause of clubs and associations.

It is probable, that by this time Mr Pitt was aware of the difficulty of his situation, with regard to the French revolution. It was at that period generally regarded with approbation in Britain, as an imitation of that spirit by which our ancestors had raised their country to a career of unexampled prosperity and happiness. At the same time, Mr Pitt must have known, that the court regarded it in a different light, and that, at no remote period, his ambition and his love of popularity might upon this question come to have very different interests. On the occasion now mentioned, he undoubtedly saw with satisfaction, a division likely to occur among those who had hitherto been his competitors for popularity. With that happy dexterity in debate, for which he appears to have been at all times remarkable, he instantly endeavoured to widen the breach, and to attach to himself a man of so much popular eloquence as Mr Burke. He declared, that he agreed with him, in almost every point that he had urged, respecting the late commotions in France. He drew a comparison, between the happy and genuine freedom enjoyed by Englishmen, and the unqualified nominal liberty of France, which was in fact, at the present moment, the most absolute, direct, and intolerable slavery. He said, he might differ from Mr Burke, in regard to some particulars, but he trusted they did not differ in fundamental principles. He felt himself bound to acknowledge, that the sentiments Mr Burke had that day professed, respecting the British constitution, filled him with the sincerest satisfaction; and the manner in which he had pledged himself, to maintain it for ever inviolate, entitled him to the gratitude of his fellow citizens at present, and of the latest posterity.

A new effort was made on the 2d of March, to procure a repeal of the corporation and test acts. The repeal of the efforts of debate were more animated on this occasion than formerly. The dissenters had prevailed with Mr Fox to introduce the motion; and the clergy of the church of England, alarmed no doubt by the downfall of the church of France, were anxious to diffuse a spirit of opposition to the intended attack upon their privileges. Mr Fox represented his whole argument as resting upon this principle, that no government has a right to animadvert upon the speculative opinions of its subjects, till these opinions produce a conduct subversive of the public tranquillity. It was said, he remarked, that certain errors in religion tended to disturb the public tranquillity; but surely political errors must have this tendency in a greater degree: yet such was the absurdity of our present test laws, that a man who favoured arbitrary power in his sentiments, who should consider the abolition of trial by jury as no violation of liberty, and the invasion of the freedom and law of parliament as no infraction of the constitution, might easily pave his way to the first situations in the state. There was no political test to bind him; the obligation of all such tests had been justly exploded by the practice of the country, and what had been the consequence of this? A religious test was imposed for a political purpose. The object of this test had originally been, to exclude antimonarchical men from civil offices. But, he said, he would ever reprobate such a procedure; it was acting under false pretences; its tendency led to hypocrisy, and served as a restraint only upon the conscientious and the honest.

Mr Pitt supported, as he had formerly done, the privileges of the established church, asserting that though opinions might not be a warrantable ground for criminal accusation, yet they might afford a good reason for excluding particular individuals from the public service, and that to discover dangerous opinions a test might be highly expedient.

Mr Burke said, that he had abstained himself from two former discussions of the subject, because his mind had not come to any decision concerning it. He was now Britain now completely hostile to the measure. Mr Fox had stated the principles of toleration and persecution, but abstract principles Mr Burke declared himself to have always disliked. Of all abstract principles, however, those of natural right, upon which dissenters rested as their strong hold, were, in his opinion, the most idle and the most dangerous. They superceded society, and snapped asunder all those bonds which had for ages constituted the happiness of mankind. Mr Burke quoted certain passages from the writings of Dr Price, Dr Priestley, and other eminent dissenters, from which it appeared, that they were the avowed enemies of the church of England. He adjured the house of commons to suffer the fatal incidents which had attended the church of France, plundered and demolished in so disgraceful a manner, to awaken their zeal for our present happy and excellent establishment. Mr Fox, in reply, declared himself filled with grief and shame, on account of the sentiments which Mr Burke had on this occasion avowed, but asserted that all the principles he had stated had formerly received the sanction of his friend. He thought Mr Burke, at present, misled by his exquisite sensibility; his feelings had been shocked and irritated by a mistaken idea of the transactions in France, which were, in reality, nothing more than the calamities, to which every country was unavoidably subject, at the period of a revolution in its government, however beneficent and salutary. The proposed repeal of the test and corporation laws was rejected, on a division of 294 against 105.

A few days thereafter, Mr Flood brought forward a motion for the reform of the representation of the people in parliament. Mr Flood proposed to add 100 members to the house of commons, to be elected by the resident householders in every county. Mr Windham opposed the motion, because the country had prospered under the representation as it stood, and because innovations were become extremely dangerous. Where, said he, is the man that would repair his house in the hurricane season? Mr Fox, on the contrary, declared himself as much persuaded as ever, of the necessity of reform; but he thought the majority of the nation of a different opinion, and therefore that the motion ought to be withdrawn. Were not this the case, he would consider the motion as extremely feasible, because no period could be more proper to begin a repair, than when a hurricane was near, and might possibly burst forth. Mr Pitt considered the proposal as brought forward at an improper time, and said he wished to wait for a more feasible opportunity, when he would certainly again submit his ideas upon the subject to the consideration of the house: By these remarks Mr Flood was induced to withdraw his proposition.

On the 5th of May, a message from the king informed both houses of parliament of certain acts of hostility committed by the Spaniards, by seizing three British vessels, that had attempted to establish a foreign trade, between China and Nootka Sound, on the west coast of North America. The Spaniards conceived the whole of that part of the American coast to be their property, and were the first to give information of what they had done, and required that steps should be taken by the British government to prevent future encroachments upon that coast. The British navy was instantly augmented, and as a war with Spain, unfitted by France, could not be formidable, the public seemed to regard the approach of hostilities with little aversion. But these same circumstances, induced the Spaniards, on this occasion, very readily to come to an accommodation.

During the present session, little progress appears to have been made in the trial of Mr Hastings. Both parties accused each other, as the authors of the delays that took place. In the mean time, the subject began to be in some measure neglected and forgotten by the public.

On the 10th of June, the king put an end to the Parliament session, by a speech from the throne, and this parliament was dissolved.

At this period, the Austrian Netherlands were in a state of great agitation. The people of these provinces in Flanders had, at all times, been governed by a feudal constitution, in which great privileges were enjoyed by the clergy, the nobles, and certain classes of citizens, but more especially by the first of these orders. Joseph II. had invaded the privileges of these bodies, and seized upon the greater part of the property belonging to the monasteries. Whoever had opposed his innovations was driven from the country, and at last, about the end of the year 1789, the exiles having contrived to unite, on the frontiers of their country, entered it, and being joined by others, formed a considerable army, which rapidly overrun the whole of Austrian Flanders. The emperor was at this time engaged in a war with the Turks, which prevented his sending any considerable force against them. In December, the states of Brabant had assembled, and appointed an administration, at the head of which was Henry Vander Noort, a popular advocate. In January 1790, the outlines of a federal constitution were formed, whereby each of the Belgic provinces was to retain its peculiar constitution, but the general defense of the republic was to be intrusted to a congress. Considerable numbers of foreigners went into the service of this new republic. It soon appeared, however, that the Belgic revolution would produce no valuable or lasting effects. The old aristocratical government, uncontrolled by the authority of a prince, was everywhere adopted. The power of the clergy was even increased. The first step of the Belgic congress, was a public declaration of religious intolerance. The liberty of the press was prohibited, and state licensers appointed. The consequence was, that discontent speedily arose. At this period, the emperor Joseph died, and was succeeded by Leopold, archduke of Tuscany. One of the first efforts of this prince, was to issue a proclamation, inviting the revolted provinces to return to their allegiance, and promising to restore their ancient political constitutions. Not trusting to peaceable measures alone, he sent an army against them, which was speedily successful, and at the termination of this year the house of Austria had recovered its authority in the Netherlands.

The new parliament assembled on the 25th of November 1790. As no uncommon efforts had taken place at the preceding elections, nearly the same members as formerly were returned to the house of commons. Mr Addington was chosen speaker, with the marked and unanimous approbation of the whole house of commons. On the following day, the session was opened by a speech from the throne, in which his majesty's speech. Britain. jestly informed parliament, that the differences which had arisen with the court of Spain, were brought to an amicable termination: That a separate peace had been made between Russia and Sweden, in which the Turks were not included, but that, in conjunction with his allies, his majesty had employed his mediation to negotiate a treaty between Russia and the Porte: That in like manner he was endeavouring to assist in putting an end, by negotiation, to the difficulties in the Netherlands. It was added, that the peace of India had been interrupted by a war with Tipoo Sultan, son of the late Hyder Ally; and the speech concluded with recommending to parliament a particular attention to the state of the province of Quebec.

Various debates occurred, which are of little importance in a historical point of view, upon the negotiations with Spain, concerning the fur trade at Nootka on the west coast of North America, and the expensive naval armament which had been fitted out to enforce the claims of Britain.

In the beginning of March 1791, a bill was brought into parliament by Mr Pitt, for regulating the government of the province of Canada in North America. This circumstance is chiefly worthy of notice, on account of an altercation to which it gave rise between Mr Burke and Mr Fox. In the last session of the former parliament, Mr Burke had declared his disapprobation of the French revolution, while Mr Sheridan and Mr Fox had expressed very opposite sentiments. Mr Pitt laid hold of the opportunity to excite division among his antagonists, and declared himself highly satisfied with Mr Burke's attachment to the British constitution. Mr Burke had long been engaged in a career of fruitless opposition to the existing government. During the king's illness, in the end of the year 1788, he at all times expressed such a degree of indecent impatience when any expectation was expressed in the house of commons of his majesty's speedy recovery, as sufficiently demonstrated how eager he was to obtain possession of the emoluments of office. It is probable that the approbation expressed by Mr Pitt, of Mr Burke's fears from the French revolution, suggested a decisive opposition to the character of that revolution, as a mode of ingratiating himself with administration, and that this idea, concurring with his former sentiments, stimulated his eager mind to devote his principal attention to this subject. In November 1790, he published a treatise, in which he endeavoured to vilify the French national assembly, and to hold out the revolution as a subject of alarm and of detestation to all Europe. The style of copious and popular eloquence in which the book was written, together with the sentiments it contained, produced a great sale of it among the higher orders of society. Replies were made to it by Dr Priestley and others; but that which was most successful in gaining the attention of the public was a pamphlet published at this time by Thomas Paine, who had formerly, in North America, published a pamphlet entitled "Common Sense," which was extremely prejudicial to the royal cause throughout the colonies. His present work contained a statement of the facts connected with the French revolution, together with much satirical remark upon what he accounted imperfections in the British constitution. He was not equal to his learned antagonist in copiousness of diction, but in shrewdness of remark and concise energy of style he was far superior. Mr Burke's love of literary fame was very great. It had been highly gratified by the attention paid to his book. He now saw his reputation rudely assailed by a dangerous rival. His temper was ruffled, and at the same time he appears to have wished to find an opportunity of separating himself from his former political associates. On the 6th of May, when the clauses of the Quebec bill were about to be read in a committee of the whole house, paragraph by paragraph, Mr Burke rose, he said, to Mr Burke, to speak to the general principle of the bill. He enlarged defects upon the importance of the act which they were about to perform, that of appointing a legislature for a distant people. He thought the first consideration ought to be the competency of the house to such an act. He said, that by what was called the rights of man, a body of principles lately imported from France, "All men are by nature free, and equal in respect to rights." If this code were admitted, the power of the British legislature would extend no farther than to call together the inhabitants of Canada to choose a constitution for themselves: rejecting this code, however, which was never preached without mischief, he would affirm the principle, that this country had acquired the right of legislating for Canada by right of conquest. The next question was, what model was to be followed in instituting a government for Canada; whether that of America, of France, or of Great Britain, which were the three great modern examples. Hence he took an opportunity to pronounce a vehement invective against the principles and enactments adopted by the French national assembly, in attempting to form a new constitution. He was called to order by some of his former friends, and an altercation ensued, during which he asserted, that a design was formed in this country by certain persons against the constitution. Mr Fox accused Mr Burke of leaving the question before the house to seek a difference with him, and to fortify misrepresentations of something which he had said in a former debate concerning the French revolution. He adhered to his former sentiments in approving the revolution, though not the new constitution of France. Mr Burke repeated his attack upon the French revolution. He declared that his friendship with Mr Fox was dissolved by that accursed event. Mr Fox, with much apparent agitation, endeavoured to soften the severity of Mr Burke, but without effect. That gentleman had evidently resolved upon the part he was to act; and this may be considered as the first occasion upon which any member of the British legislature represented his own conduct as seriously influenced, to the extent of being led to desert his former political views and associates, in consequence of an alarm originating in the example of the French revolution.

During this session, the question of the slave trade was again brought forward by Mr Wilberforce, on the 18th of April, in a very copious speech, which he concluded by moving for leave to bring in a bill to prevent the further importation of African negroes into the British colonies. He was supported by Mr Pitt and Mr Fox. His motion, however, was negatived by a majority of 75. The zeal of the nation upon the subject, however, had at this time become very great. The evidence which had been led before the house of commons, commons, had represented this trade as the source of multitudes of crimes, and of an immense mass of misery. Considerable numbers of persons became not a little scrupulous, even about the use of sugar, a commodity said to be produced by means of so much wretchedness and injustice. In consequence of subscriptions to a large amount, a company was established with the view of civilizing the natives of Africa, and of cultivating, by the hands of freemen, the West India productions in that country. A bill for granting to this company a charter was introduced on the 28th of March. They fixed their settlement at Sierra Leone, on the western coast of the central region of Africa; but the ultimate object of the undertaking has hitherto made little progress.

On the 28th of March, a message from his majesty announced, that his endeavours, in conjunction with his allies, to effect a pacification between Russia and the Turks, not having proved successful, he judged it necessary to add weight to his representations, by making some farther augmentation of his naval force. The question in dispute was this: The emperors of Russia had gradually been making progress in their attempts for the subjugation of the Turkish provinces in her neighbourhood. After many efforts she had taken Oczakow, a town situated upon the Black sea, at the mouth of the river Dnieper, and considered as a situation, which at a future period might enable her to carry war into the very heart of the Ottoman empire. The Turks, being greatly exhausted, were reduced to the necessity of purchasing tranquillity at almost any price; but Prussia, being alarmed on account of the growing greatness of Russia, had, in conjunction with Britain and Holland, offered to mediate a peace, with a view to procure the restoration of Oczakow to its former masters. Russia refused the offer of mediation. She also refused to renew any commercial treaty with Britain, though she made one with France, and another with Spain. She even entered into a quadruple alliance with these two countries, and with Austria, for the obvious purpose of restraining the influence of Prussia, Britain, and Holland. Mr Pitt, in the usual form, moved an address to his majesty in consequence of the message. He said, that having entered into defensive alliances, which were admitted to be wise and politic, we ought to adhere to them, and if possible to prevent any changes in the general state of affairs, which might render them nugatory. Prussia was our ally; any event therefore which might affect that power, and diminish its influence on the continent, would be injurious to ourselves, as far as our mutual interests were united. The progress of the Russian arms against the Porte gave sufficient cause for alarm; for should success still attend them, and the power of the Porte be farther humbled by its aspiring rival, Prussia would instantly feel it; and not Prussia alone, but all Europe, which might prove in danger of being shaken to its very foundation.

Mr Fox expressed his conviction, on the contrary, that Prussia could not be endangered by any progress which the Russian arms might make in Turkey. An alliance with Russia appeared to him the most natural and most advantageous which we could possibly form. The address was carried by a majority of 228 against 135. Opposition finding themselves upon this occasion supported by greater numbers than usual, and that a British war with Russia was unpopular throughout the nation, brought forward the question repeatedly for discussion. The result was, that administration, finding the current of public opinion to run against them, deferred their pretensions, and refused to support Prussia in attempting to fet bounds to the ambition of the Russians.

On considering the state of Europe at the time, we apprehend that administration were guided, in their jealousy of Russia, by the maxims which influenced the politics of Great Britain during the best periods of its history. The Spanish monarchy had long been in a state of such debility as rendered it of little weight or importance on the continent of Europe. France likewise, during a considerable number of years, had suffered her armies to decline, and had fallen by a sort of family compact under the influence of Austria. In consequence of the revolution, or rather of the weaknesses which preceded it, her capacity of interfering in foreign affairs had been utterly lost. In the mean time, Austria and Russia, relinquishing all rivalry, had of late years entered into a close combination, and acted in subordination to each other's ambition. To preserve against these two great military empires some tolerable balance of power on the continent of Europe, it became absolutely necessary that Great Britain and Holland should join their whole strength to that of Prussia and Sweden, and that these should protect the Turks, merely for the purpose of preventing the further aggrandizement of the two great and warlike powers of Russia and Austria. Prussia at this time had farther endeavoured to fortify herself against Russia, by encouraging an attempt made by the king, and some of the patriotic nobles of Poland, to reform the government of that ill-fated country, by abolishing the feudal anarchy, rendering the throne hereditary, and establishing a constitution formed in imitation of that of Great Britain. The British ministry, however, finding a war with Russia unlikely to prove popular, and that it was disliked by many of their friends in parliament, consented that Great Britain should relinquish, on this occasion, the proud office of holding the balance of the continent, for which she had on former occasions so lavishly sacrificed her blood and her wealth. The consequences of this defection speedily appeared. Prussia was under the necessity of joining Russia and Austria in their schemes of aggrandizement; at the expense of the weaker powers, that she might strengthen herself by a share of the spoil. How far the British administration acted with magnanimity in deferring what they accounted their duty, in compliance with the apparent wish of the nation, is a question which was never discussed; because the consequences of Great Britain deferring its usual political station at this time were soon overlooked and forgotten, amidst the great events which speedily occurred to alter the relative force of the states of Europe. But the impartial voice of history will probably hereafter record the event now alluded to in a manner little to the credit either of the people, or of the political parties, of Great Britain. During the preceding year, the public had no objection to a Spanish war, because plunder was to be won, while no danger was to be apprehended. They now disliked a war with Russia, in which nothing could be gained, while trade might be interrupted. From the love of popularity, and the habit of resisting all the projects of administration, opposition at this time encouraged the pusillanimity of their countrymen, which soon cost Europe and Britain very dear; while the members of administration, from the fear of losing their places, suffered their country to be degraded from its rank and influence in the scale of Europe, and prepared the way for the partition of Poland, the projected partition of France, the war of the revolution by which that project was resisted, and the immeasurable aggrandizement of that power which soon proved so dangerous to Europe and to Britain.

An unsuccessful effort was made during this session of parliament by Sir Gilbert Elliot, to procure for the members of the church of Scotland, an exemption from the test act. The general arguments employed in favour of the application were nearly the same with those formerly stated in support of a repeal of that statute; and it was added, that by the treaty of union, the subjects of both countries were to have a free communication of right throughout the whole united empire, which the members of the Scottish presbyterian church could not enjoy while the English test act remained in force. To this it was replied, that it was certainly known to the Scotch, previous to the treaty of union, that the test act existed, as appears by their own debates on the subject. This being the case, being fully aware of it, and voluntarily agreeing to the union notwithstanding its existence, any attempt to get rid of it at present was a kind of chicane which would never be countenanced in private conduct. The motion was rejected by a majority of 87.

A part of the body of the Roman Catholics in England were more fortunate, during the present session, in obtaining relief from certain penal statutes. As the Romish church was the great object both of political and religious terror in the first stages of the reformation in Europe, the English statute book was loaded with the most rigorous edicts against the professors of that obnoxious faith. Though, in the year 1780, some of these were removed; yet in the year 1791, in a well-known book, Burn's Ecclesiastical Law, not less than 70 pages were to be found occupied with the enumeration of the penal statutes in force against the Roman Catholics. Among these were some of the most sanguinary nature. It was high treason and death to make a convert to the Roman Catholic faith; severe penalties were enacted against Papists hearing mass by some statutes, and by others they were compelled to attend the established worship, however contrary to their consciences. A reform in the penal statutes was now more obviously reasonable, since, in the year 1790, a body of Catholic dissenters had formally protested against the temporal power of the pope, and against his assumed authority to release men from their civil obligations, or to dispense with the sacredness of oaths. Mr Millford brought forward a bill to relieve these protesting Catholics from the penalties and disabilities to which persons professing the Popish religion were by law subject. The bill passed unanimously, excepting that Mr Fox wished to extend it not merely to professing, but to all Roman Catholics, upon this principle, that in his apprehension the state has no right to inquire into the opinions of the people either political or religious, but only to take cognizance of their actions.

This sentiment was opposed by Mr Burke, who said that opinions might influence the human passions, and that the passions govern the man; that it was therefore the duty of the state to watch over the opinions of the people; but in this case, he observed, there was no danger from the pope; it was not by him that the Americans were absolved from their allegiance, nor had his interference produced any of the late revolutions in Europe.

The war which was now carrying on in India was war in the cause of some debates during the present session. Like all other wars in that quarter of the globe, it was undertaken, on our part, for the purpose of aggrandisement, and on the part of our antagonist, from a jealousy of the British power. The offensive cause of this offensive war, however, was this. The Dutch had long been in possession of two forts, called Cranganore and Jaccotab, upon the frontier of Hyder Ally's kingdom of Mysore. In the year 1780, Hyder seized and garrisoned these forts, under the pretence that they belonged to a vassal of his. Having speedily thereafter joined the Dutch and French against the British, the forts were given up to the Dutch; but in 1789 Tippoo again claimed the forts. The Dutch, dreading his power, sold the forts to the rajah of Travancore, a vassal or ally of the British. Tippoo, resenting this mode of evading his claim, made war upon Travancore; but as the rajah had made his purchase under secret instructions from the British government in India, he was defended by them. Thus the war was said, on our part, to have been made in defence of the just rights of our ally, the rajah of Travancore; while on the other hand, it was contended that this was nothing more than an attempt made to subdue the monarch of Mysore, and extend our eastern empire, at a time when the power of France was annihilated, and our own forces in great strength in that quarter.

In the trial of Mr Hastings little progress was made during the present session. As parliament had been Mr Haffs dissolved during the dependence of the trial, a questionings occurred, whether that circumstance did not put an end to the impeachment. The friends of Mr Hastings adopted the affirmative side of the question. They were supported by Mr Erskine and the attorney and solicitor general, M'Donald and Scott; while Mr Pitt, Mr Burke, and Mr Fox, contended, that a dissolution had no effect upon an impeachment. The argument, from expediency, seemed to be upon their side; as, if the house of commons were not to be held a permanent body, every judicial proceeding of this kind would be subject to interruption from the prerogative of the crown. It was carried in the house of commons, that the impeachment was still depending, or, in the language of the lawyers, that it did not abate by a dissolution of parliament. The same decision was adopted by a majority of the house of lords, on the 16th day of May; and the session of parliament was concluded on the 10th of June.

As the avowed purpose of the first leaders of the early popes' revolution which had recently occurred in France, was partly of the establishment of a system of political freedom, or the French of a representative government, with a hereditary revolution, monarch at its head, and as one of the consequences which they expected to follow from the establishment of of the new system, was the complete abolition of wars, which, unmindful of the general temper and violent passions of men, they ascribed entirely to the ambition of kings, the progress of the revolution was regarded with much favour by persons of a speculative character in Great Britain. The reform of the Roman Catholic church, though it alarmed the English clergy, was favourably regarded by the English dissenters, and the abolition of titles of honour was not disliked in a country where they are only enjoyed by a few individuals, and are chiefly valued, not for themselves, but on account of the privilege of hereditary legislation, by which they are accompanied. The English also had at all times been accustomed to boast of their own political freedom, and of their superiority in this respect over their French neighbours. When the populace of Paris rose in arms, when the military refused to act against them, and the state prison or fortress of the Bastille was taken and demolished, persons fond of political speculation in Great Britain regarded with applause, as an imitation of the efforts of our own ancestors, the attempts made by the French to shake off their ancient despotic government, and to renovate the order of society. Though the British public at large had not yet given much attention to the subject, yet, of the curious and the idle, a sufficient number had done so to form parties who commemorated the 14th of July, the day on which the Bastille was taken, by convivial meetings in taverns in many of the most considerable towns throughout the island. These meetings were, on the whole, understood to be rather unfavourably regarded by that description of persons who are most attached to the monarchical part of our constitution, but no public expression of disapprobation had hitherto appeared. One of these felicitous meetings was to have been held at Birmingham on Thursday the 14th of July 1791; but on the preceding Monday, some copies were left in a public house, by a person unknown, of a hand-bill of a most inflammatory nature, which represented the late transactions in France as proper to be imitated in England. The contents of this hand-bill, having been generally circulated, produced much conversation in the town, and the magistrates offered a reward of 100 guineas for discovering the author, printer, or publisher of it. In the meantime, the friends of the intended meeting thought it necessary to disclaim the sentiments contained in the seditious hand-bill; but finding their views misrepresented, they at one time resolved that the meeting should not take place. Another determination was afterwards adopted, and the company assembled to the amount of 80 in number. The house was soon surrounded by a tumultuous mob, who expressed their disapproval by hisses and groans, and by the shout of "church and king," which became the watchword on this occasion, upon which the meeting immediately dispersed. In the evening of the same day, the mob attacked and burned an unitarian meeting-house belonging to the congregation of the celebrated Dr Joseph Priestley, a man who, at that time, as an experimental philosopher, and a voluminous but most ingenious and original writer upon a great variety of speculative subjects, might be considered as at the head of English literature. Dr Priestley himself had not been present at the convivial assembly above mentioned; at half-past nine at night, however, he was under the necessity of suddenly escaping with his family from his own house, which was attacked by the mob. The whole of his library, his valuable philosophical apparatus, and his manuscripts and papers, were destroyed. The magistrates were accused of having at first favoured and given encouragement to the mob, whose fury they afterwards found it impossible to resist. During three succeeding days they destroyed some other meeting-houses, together with the dwelling-houses of several eminent dissenters in the neighbourhood. It was not till Sunday night that some parties of light dragoons arrived in Birmingham; and the first days of the week were spent in scouring the country, to clear it of the parties of rioters, who, in different directions, attacked the houses of dissenters. Five of the rioters were tried at Worcester, and one was convicted and executed. At Warwick twelve were tried, and four were convicted of burning and destroying houses; three were executed, and one was reprieved upon the application of the magistrates, as it appeared that his interference in the riot was accidental, and that he had only made an opening into a house to let out a body of smoke by which a party of the rioters were about to be suffocated from fire of their own raising.

At this time a foundation was laid on the European continent for the most important political changes, on the state of Europe. The various nations of Europe had for some centuries owed their independence to the mutual jealousies which they entertained. Many petty states were altogether unable to contend in war against their powerful neighbours; but they were safe, because these neighbours were held in check by other great powers, who would not permit their aggrandisement. When any one nation became dangerous by its ambition, the combination of a number of other states repressed its progress. In this way the Spanish, and afterwards the French monarchies were retained within bounds. During the late century a new power, that of Russia, had become formidable in Europe, and its rulers contrived rather to undermine than to overthrow that balance of strength to which the lesser states of Europe had owed their safety. A former Russian empress had entered into close ties of amity with the empress queen of Hungary, or head of the house of Austria. This union had nearly proved fatal to the Prussian monarchy, notwithstanding the talents of the great Frederick. The house of Austria, finding the advantage of such an alliance, attempted, at the same time, to attach itself to France, its ancient hereditary enemy, by the marriage of the archduchess Maria Antonietta to the dauphin. This marriage had fully produced its intended political effects. The French court, relinquishing its former policy of humbling Austria, suffered its armies to decay, and allowed itself to be led on all occasions by this more active power. The French revolution, which so essentially altered the whole government of the state and order of society, by subverting every existing establishment, and exciting jealousies and discontent in every quarter, brought the nation, in the eyes of foreign powers, into a state of utter debility. The king and royal family had been exposed to endless insults and humiliations, and compelled to submit to a new constitution, which placed the royal authority on very very precarious footing. The principal nobility had emigrated. The king himself had attempted to do the same, but was seized, and brought back as a fugitive, and reluctantly placed at the head of a form of government of which he disapproved.

In this state of affairs the two great military powers, Russia and Austria, acting in conjunction, saw nothing to resist their ambition. They had recently wished to divide the best provinces of the Turkish empire between them. The Austrians had met with unexpected resistance, and desisted from the attempt. The Russians, on their side, were more successful. The king of Prussia, with the aid of Britain and Holland, had attempted to restrain the progress of Russia; but being deserted by Britain, he now found it necessary to be upon good terms with that power, and with Austria; and for that purpose, as well as to avoid being left behind in the career of usurpation and aggrandisement, to enter into all their ambitious schemes.

Poland and France were, at this time, two of the weakest states in Europe. We have said, that for the sake of erecting a barrier to his own states, the Prussian monarch had encouraged the king and the leading nobles of Poland to form for their country a new political constitution, by which its government might be strengthened; but Russia and Austria had cast their eyes upon this country, with a view (in imitation of what they had done in 1772) to seize its best provinces, and the king of Prussia now found it necessary to acquiesce in this project. The state of France at this period held out great temptations to the formation of a similar project with regard to it. Leopold, emperor of Germany, in consequence of the ties of affinity, had a fair excuse for interfering in French affairs, to refuse the king from the state of thraldom into which he had evidently been brought by his subjects. At the same time, the other princes of Europe were become jealous of the example set by France, of limiting the authority of a monarch, of destroying the privileges of the nobility, and reducing to a level all classes of persons in the state. It therefore now formed a part of the plan of the united powers of the north to restore the French king and his nobles; but at the same time it was determined to divide among themselves or their allies a part of the provinces of France. These points were adjusted towards the close of the summer 1791, at a meeting which took place at Pillnitz in Saxony between the emperor Leopold and the king of Prussia. The treaty was intended to be kept secret; but it speedily transpired, and was afterwards, by the jealousy which it excited in the French nation, the cause of some important events. Its general object is understood to have been the partition of Poland, and of a part of France. Poland was to be divided among the three great military powers in different proportions. With regard to France, the emperor was to obtain Bavaria; in exchange for which he was to conquer the French Netherlands, and give them, along with the Austrian Netherlands, to the elector of Bavaria. The archduke Charles was to obtain the duchy of Lorraine. Strasbourg and Alsace were to be restored to the empire. The king of Sardinia was to receive Dauphiny, if he acceded to the coalition. Spain was to receive, on the same condition, the French part of the island of St Domingo, with Corsica and Rouillon, and Bearn. The Swiss cantons, if they acceded to the coalition, were likewise to receive certain territories. This treaty was publicly disavowed; but at the same time, it was universally talked of and believed throughout Europe, under the appellation of the Concert of Princes.

The British parliament assembled on the 31st of January 1792. A variety of uninteresting debates assembled, the principal of which related to the armament which had taken place on account of the dispute with Russia concerning Oczakow. As ministry had adopted mild measures, opposition endeavoured to triumph over them, in consequence of their own successful resistance to the intended interference in continental affairs. Administration chiefly rested their defence upon the importance of preserving the balance of power on the continent. As France had now totally sunk into insignificance, they contended, that the only power now to be dreaded was Russia, which had shown a hostile spirit against Great Britain, and could only be resisted by adhering to Prussia, and protecting the Turkish empire.

During the preceding autumn, the second son of Duke of the king, the duke of York, had married a daughter of York's marriage. This prince was known to be a favourite son; and as the marriage was understood to have been contracted, not as a political engine like the usual marriages of princes, but from the private choice of the parties, it gave much satisfaction to the public in Britain. The dowry of the princess amounted to £20,000, a sum which, in the wealthy nation of Great Britain, was considered as unworthy of notice in the solemn treaty entered into between the British and Prussian monarchs on this occasion. A provision of £37,000 per annum was readily made by parliament for the parties.

On the 17th of February, Mr Pitt brought forward a statement of the public revenue, from which it appeared, that about £400,000 might be applied towards the extinction of taxes, or the payment of the national debt. He proposed, therefore, to remove an additional tax which had recently been imposed upon malt, together with the taxes on female servants, on carts and waggons, and on houses under seven windows, and part of the duty on candles. The repeal of these taxes would, he said, diminish the revenue to the extent of £222,000, and the other £200,000, he proposed to apply to the reduction of the national debt. Mr Pitt concluded by giving a most flattering statement of the prosperity and happy prospects of the country, declaring, however, that these prospects were connected with peace abroad and tranquillity at home, of any interruption to which he appeared to entertain no doubt.

On the 2d of April, the question of the African slave-trade was again brought under the consideration of the house of commons by Mr Wilberforce. He disclaimed any project of immediately emancipating the negroes, whom he admitted to be in a state unfit to receive the enjoyment of freedom; but he contended, that, by the immediate abolition of the importation of new slaves, the state of those in the West Indies would be improved, by the necessity under which the planters would be brought of treating them well, that they might produce families to support the population of... of the islands. From the evidence which had been led before the house of commons, Mr Wilberforce stated various instances of extreme barbarity on the part of the traders in slaves, together with the loss of seamen as well as of negroes, occasioned by the unhealthy state into which the latter fell in consequence of their captivity and expatriation. The slave-trade was defended on this occasion by Colonel Tarleton and Mr Jenkinson, on the general principle of its having received the sanction of parliament, and that an immense yearly loss would fall on the manufacturers and shipbuilders of this country in consequence of its abolition. Mr Wilberforce was supported by Mr Montague, Mr Whitbread, and Mr Milbank. Mr Dundas professed himself a friend to the abolition of the slave-trade, and that he only entertained doubts with respect to the mode of effecting it. He thought the African trade not founded in policy, and agreed, that the continuation of it was not essential to the West India islands, where he thought, that without it, the human race might not only be maintained but increased; but he doubted of the propriety of a direct abolition of the trade. He proposed to accomplish the object by regulations tending to promote the increase of the negroes in the West Indies, and gradually to put an end to hereditary slavery. Mr Addington agreed in opinion with Mr Dundas. He thought the trade ought to exist for some years longer, and therefore could not vote for an immediate abolition; but he proposed certain regulations for giving grants of land or money to those who should rear a certain number of children, to institute premiums for the invention of instruments of agriculture; and that the importation of males should be subject to a heavier duty than that of females, to promote the population of the islands, to which he thought the trade still necessary.

Mr Fox deprecated, upon this subject, in strong terms every kind of deception or delusion upon the country. He said he neither felt, nor wished to feel, anything like moderation on the question. Regulations would be as disgraceful as they would be impotent. He reproved, in particular, Mr Addington's proposal premium for the transportation, that is, for the kidnapping, of females. He said, he should like to see the clause by which this inhuman measure was to be presented to the parliament of England, or the man capable of conceiving words in which it should be framed. Last session, said Mr Fox, we were cajoled, and taught to believe, that something would be early brought forward. Have we not passed a year, and nothing has been done? Are we still to be deluded and betrayed? Why were we not at an earlier period entertained by the proposition for a gradual abolition? Mr Dundas having moved, as an amendment of Mr Wilberforce's motion, that the trade should be abolished "gradually," Mr Pitt declared his disapprobation of the amendment. He lamented the state of barbarism in which the wretched Africans were plunged in consequence of the trade; and repeated certain calculations which he had produced in the former session, to show, that the population of the islands might be supplied without any supply from Africa. The motion for a gradual abolition was carried by a majority of 68.

On the 23rd of April, Mr Dundas stated the regulations which he meant to propose, towards accomplishing the abolition of the trade; these consisted chiefly of increasing the duties upon the age of the negroes imported; of abolishing the trade, so far as not intended for the supply of our own islands; of limiting the tonnage to be employed in it; and, of punishing British subjects, guilty of crimes in the conduct of it. He proposed, that the importation of negroes into the British colonies, should cease on the 1st of January 1800. Mr Wilberforce disclaimed all acquiescence in these propositions; and Mr Fox ridiculed them, by asking where was the baptismal register kept on the coast of Africa, to ascertain the age of those who were to be exported. Lord Mornington moved, that the abolition should take place on the 1st of January 1793, expressing his satisfaction, that the great blow to the slave-trade was struck, but alleging, that it admitted of no modification, as we could not modify injustice, and could not carry on a trade which we had condemned as inhuman. Lord Mornington's amendment, however, was rejected by a majority of 49. On a future day, he altered the period of abolition to the 1st of January 1795, and at last consented that it should be fixed for the 1st of January 1796, and this amendment was carried by a majority of 40. On the 1st of May, a series of resolutions, similar on the whole to those proposed by Mr Dundas, were presented to the house of commons by Mr Pitt. In the upper house, the advocates for the abolition were less successful; and they were not a little provoked, on finding one of the younger branches of the royal family, the duke of Clarence, declaring himself decidedly hostile to their wishes, in what they accounted a question of humanity. On the 8th of May, the subject came forward upon a question of form, regarding the expediency of hearing evidence at the bar of the house, or before a committee. The friends of the abolition, Lord Grenville, the bishop of London, Lord Porchester, Earl Stanhope, and Lord Rawdon, de-fied despatch, and therefore urged the necessity of a committee; but the duke of Clarence, the lord-chancellor, Lord Stormont, Lord Hawkebury, and the bishop of St David's, pleaded with success for hearing evidence at the bar. Evidence was accordingly ordered to be heard at the bar, which necessarily produced delay, and little progress was made during the session.

On the 18th of April, Mr Sheridan moved for a Scotch inquiry into the grievances, of which the royal boroughs of Scotland had complained by petition. Of reform, 66 royal boroughs, 50 concurred in the complaint, which Mr Sheridan now supported. The petitions complained of the mismanagement of the revenues of the boroughs by their magistrates, who were self-elected, that is, elected their own successors, and, at the same time, could not be called to account before any court of law. The remedy proposed by Mr Sheridan for the abuses, consisted of abolishing the self-electing power of the magistrates, and of extending the right of election. Alluding to the subject of the French revolution, he said, that by afflicting us of tranquillity abroad, it afforded leisure to look into abuses at home, and that the lesson which that event ought to afford, was this, that rational and sober reformation of abuses, in a season of tranquillity, was the best way of avoiding the Britain. the evils of a reform accomplished by violence. The motion was refuted by Mr Anstruther, Mr Dundas, and Sir J. St Clair Erskine, upon the general ground that no serious grievance existed, and the inquiry was refused by a majority of 69 against 27.

Excepting some debates relative to the French revolution, nothing farther of importance occurred during the present session: and that we may not afterwards have occasion to interrupt our detail of the transactions connected with this interesting event, we shall here take notice of the war which had for some time been going on in India, and which was now brought to a fortunate termination. The western side of the peninsula of Hindostan consists of a level country for about 70 miles inwards. At the back of this level tract of territory, and parallel to the ocean, runs a chain of lofty mountains, whose front is abruptly broken towards the west, forming tremendous precipices, but which on the other side consist of an extensive plain, gradually descending eastward to the bay of Bengal, and forming the territory of the Mahrattas, Mylore, Madras, the Carnatic, and other states included within that great peninsula. Tippoo possessed territory on both sides of these mountains, which are denominated Ghauts (passes), from the narrow paths or passes, by which they are ascended. The British Carnatic army, under General Meadows, was directed to attack the territories of Tippoo from the east; while the Bombay army, under General Abercromby, was to reduce the country to the westward of the Ghauts. The Mahrattas, and the nizam of the Decan, agreed to attack Tippoo's country from the north and northeast, where it touched their own territories; and Seringapatam his capital was fixed upon, as the point towards which the whole of the hostile armies were to direct their efforts.

On the 15th of June 1790, General Meadows entered Tippoo's country. The grand army on this occasion amounted to 14,000 effective men, a body of European troops which no power in India could encounter in the field, on account of the superiority possessed by men of the race of Europe, over the timid and superstitious natives of that enfeebled climate. A variety of operations occurred, which are uninteresting in detail, on account of the want of equality between the contending parties. Little, however, appears to have been accomplished towards the subjugation of the enemy (excepting the capture of the country to the westward of the Ghauts by General Abercromby) till the end of February 1791, when Lord Cornwallis, having assumed the command in person, proceeded against Bangalore, which he reached on the 5th of March. A breach being made in the walls by means of four batteries, the fort was stormed on the 21st, with little loss to the British. Of the garrison not less than 1000 were massacred with the bayonet, and a small number were taken. Earl Cornwallis being joined by above 14,000 of the nizam's troops, and 700 Europeans, with 4580 troops under Colonel Oldham, proceeded against Seringapatam, in the neighbourhood of which he arrived on the 13th of May, after a difficult march in bad weather over a hilly and barren country. Tippoo now stood an engagement, in which, though he was beaten, he suffered little loss; but he was under the necessity of retiring into his capital, which being defended by a river, which at this season was swelled with rains, afforded him protection. Lord Cornwallis finding himself destitute of provisions to support his army during a protracted siege, and General Abercromby not having been able to join him from the west, he judged it prudent to return to Bangalore, after destroying his battering artillery. On his retreat he was joined by the Mahrattas, to the number of 30,000. General Abercromby, in the mean time, retired across the Ghauts to the westward, with a fatigued and dispirited army, and thus for the present Tippoo escaped the necessity of standing a siege in his capital.

After his retreat, Lord Cornwallis employed himself for some time in reducing various smaller forts in the neighbourhood of Bangalore. Some of these forts described as of such prodigious natural strength, as would render them, in any other hands than those of the feeble natives of that country, absolutely impregnable. Nundydroog is described as built on the summit of a mountain 1700 feet in height, three-fourths of which are absolutely inaccessible. After a siege, from the 22d of September to the 18th of October, a breach was made, and the place was assaulted at midnight, and taken, though not by surprize. In consequence of the efforts of Captain Robertson, little blood was shed upon this occasion. The fortres of Saven-droog, 18 miles to the west of Bangalore, is described as still more strongly situated. It stands on the summit of a vast mountain or rock, which rises half a mile in perpendicular height, from a table or base of eight or ten miles in circumference. At its summit it is divided into two hills, which have each their peculiar defences, and are capable of being maintained independent of the lower works. The whole mountain is surrounded by a strong wall, and in every accessible part cross walls and barriers are erected; yet this stupendous fortress was taken in ten days.

In December, General Abercromby once more crossed the Ghauts, and proceeded eastward towards the Mylore country, while Lord Cornwallis, in the beginning of February 1792, advanced from Bangalore. He arrived on the 5th within sight of Seringapatam, under the walls of which Tippoo Sultan was posted to receive him. On the 6th of February, at Seringapatam, eight o'clock in the evening, the British made an attempt to break through Tippoo's camp. After an engagement in different points, some parties of the British crossed the river, and posted themselves upon the island on which the city of Seringapatam stands. Being thus prefled by the invaders in every quarter, his palace and beautiful gardens in their possession, and his power reduced within the narrow limits of a fortress, Tippoo found it necessary to endeavour to purchase peace upon almost any terms. With this view he released two prisoners, lieutenants Chalmers and Nath, and requested the former of these gentlemen to present a letter from him to Lord Cornwallis. The operations of the siege, however, still continued to go on; and, on the 19th of February, the trenches were opened, while the Bombay army, under General Abercromby, invested the western side of the capital. But a cessation of hostilities was agreed upon on the 23d of February. By the treaty of peace, concluded on this occasion, it was stipulated, 1st, That Tippoo was to cede one half of Tippee. of his dominions to the allied British and Indian powers; 2dly, That he was to pay three crores and 30 lacks of rupees; 3dly, That all prisoners were to be restored; 4thly, That two of the sultan's three eldest sons were to become hostages for the due performance of the treaty. On the 26th, the two princes, each mounted on an elephant, richly caparisoned, proceeded from the fort to Lord Cornwallis's camp, where they were received by his lordship with his staff. The eldest, Abdul Kallich, was about ten, the youngest Mooza-ud-deen, about eight, years of age. The princes were dressed in long white muslin gowns, with red turbans richly adorned with pearls. Educated from infancy with the utmost care, the spectators were astonished to behold in these children all the reserve, the politeness, and attention, of maturer years. The kindness with which they were received by the British commander, appeared to afford them visible satisfaction. Some presents were exchanged on both sides; and the scene is described by an eye witness, Major Dirom, as highly interesting. It was the 19th of March before the definitive treaty was finally adjusted, and delivered by the young princes into the hands of Lord Cornwallis.

In the meanwhile the nations of Europe were hastening fast into scenes of unparalleled importance and activity. These arose from two causes, the ambition of the great military powers of Europe, and the French revolution. When, by a corruption of that policy which had once produced a vigilant attention to what was called the balance of power, Russia and Austria had formed, as already mentioned, the new project of extending their dominions, not by contending in arms, as had been the custom of former ages, against nations of the great equal strength, but by amicably dividing the weaker states; and Prussia, not to be left behind in the career of aggrandisement, found it necessary to concur in their policy; it became evident that the situation of Europe must speedily undergo great changes; and there was reason to fear that the mildness of government, which in some measure had arisen from the facility of emigration, and of obtaining protection in neighbouring states, might come to an end. The French revolution, which had speedily reduced that once potent monarchy to a state of complete debility, seemed to afford an opportunity to the remaining great powers to extend their system of ambition, by enabling them to regard its ample and fertile territories as a farther subject of partition.

In another point of view, however, this revolution had now begun to appear an object of no small jealousy and alarm. The distinguished place which France holds among the nations of Europe, rendered the late change of her government an object of universal attention; and it now began to be seriously feared as an object of imitation. The public discussions which took place in her national assemblies, and in printed publications, were conveyed, through the medium of a language almost universally understood, to the most obscure corners of Europe; and kings, nobles, and priests, became apprehensive, that the contagion of innovation might not terminate in the country in which it had begun. Hence a general excitement among these ruling classes of society, that an effort should be made to overwhelm, before it should be too late,

Vol. IV. Part II. The value of the most important of all arts, that of agriculture, had gradually been seen. The reasonings and experiments of philosophers were employed upon it; and in Prussia, Russia, and other countries, it was cherished by royal bounty. Poland was still behind the other nations of Europe. There the authority of the crown was little more than nominal. A feudal aristocracy governed the country, and the cultivators of the soil were in a state of slavery. Even there, however, it became a sort of fashion among the more enlightened nobles to give freedom to their peasants.

The mercantile interest advanced still more rapidly into importance in Europe. The pre-eminence which commerce had given to Great Britain, stimulated all who had the means and the opportunity, to foster and increase it by every artificial aid among their own subjects. Manufactories were established and supported by many of the crowned heads on the continent; and trading companies were erected, veiled with ample immunities, and sometimes assisted with great loans. The pride of the military nobility was passing away. They found successful rivals for the efficient offices of state in the professors of the law. The establishment of standing armies rendered them of little importance in war; and their wealth, as the great landholders of Europe, was daily more and more eclipsed by the opulence of the industrious classes; and though titles of honour still remained, the estimation in which they were held was much diminished, in consequence of the attention universally paid to men of letters. Still, however, considerable abuses remained. In those states that had resisted in former times the innovations produced by religious zeal, a wealthy priesthood and monastic orders still existed. The privileges of the nobles and of the clergy rendered taxation unequal; and commerce was embarrassed by restrictive laws, and the privileges of old incorporations. There was therefore much to reform among the continental states of Europe; but everywhere princes were seen taking pride in helping forward this work of reformation. In particular, the late emperor of Germany was extremely eager to distinguish himself in this career. He abolished monastic establishments, emancipated the peasants, abolished the privileges of the nobles to a very great degree, and extended the protection of the law, and the privileges enjoyed by other subjects, to that unfortunate people, the Jews, who had long been objects of religious hatred and persecution. This prince, however, urged his projects with a degree of reflection and impatience, which in many instances defeated the purpose for which they were undertaken, by not giving leisure to the sentiments of the people to go along with him in his innovations.

Though the house of Bourbon had supported in France the Roman Catholic system of superstition, yet, upon the whole, they were of a more liberal spirit than any other royal family in Europe, and had given greater encouragement to letters, and to every kind of improvement. It is not wonderful, therefore, that in France, the Roman Catholic superstition had become contemptible, and that the desire for improving the condition of mankind, and simplifying the arrangements of society, which was everywhere pursued by the princes of Europe, should here have become extremely prevalent. Unfortunately, however, though the benevolent character of the reigning monarch led him to encourage such projects, yet his undecided and inactive spirit, together with the embarrassed state of the finances, prevented him from taking the lead in these changes, or from repelling them when inordinately pursued by others. In the mean time, the example of prosperity enjoyed under the free constitution of Great Britain, together with the pride of having recently contributed to the establishment of a republican government in North America, fixed the character of any changes of a political nature, which at this period might originate in France, from the men of letters, the army, or the people at large.

There is a passion of the human mind, to which philosophers have not hitherto given a name, which at reforming times remains dormant for ages, but which, when history and kindled into action, seldom fails to alter the whole character of society. This is the passion or rage for reforming the world, or for propagating that, which under the influence of this sentiment appears good for the human race, or just and right with regard to society at large. In the regions of Asia, under the Arabian prophet, it assumed the form of a zeal for religious truth, or a passion to destroy every form of idolatry, and to bring mankind to the worship of one God. Supported by the energy which this passion inspired, and the contagious frenzy which it communicated, the Mahometan faith was conveyed from the Arabic gulf to the banks of the Ganges, the deserts of Tartary and of Africa. At one time it seemed to embrace all Europe, invading Germany from the east, and advancing from the south through Spain into the centre of France, where its career was with difficulty arrested by Charles Martel, after a sanguinary conflict of many days. The same passion has, in Europe, at different times, assumed the form of a zeal for freedom and of religious enthusiasm. At the time of the reformation from Popery, it chiefly appeared under the aspect of a desire to accomplish religious reform. In those countries which, like England, were vigorously governed, and where the prince and the people concurred in the same object, the zeal of the multitude was restrained, and the reformation was not carried to extremes; but where the populace led the way, as in Scotland, Geneva, and other places, the reformation was destructive to all ancient religious institutions. When the passion for reform, after two centuries of internal tranquillity, was communicated to the French nation, by the example of the princes of Europe and of the citizens of America, it assumed the shape of a zeal for freedom, and religion was treated with contempt. The passion, however, was the same that had formerly induced the European states to engage in sanguinary wars for the support or the overthrow of their religious establishments. In both cases, the followers of the new feet were filled with enthusiastic notions of their own powers and their own worth, with visionary schemes of impracticable improvement, and with complete impatience of opposition, accompanied with an eager zeal for making proselytes. Like other social passions, its contagion rapidly flew from city to city, and in a less or greater degree it extended to the utmost limits of Europe. It more particularly seized the minds of men of letters, who regarded the French revolution, in its commencement, commencement, as their own work, and as the fruit of the war which they had long waged against monastic institutions, and the exemptions from taxes, or the public burdens of the state, which were enjoyed by the privileged orders. On the other hand, princes and the clergy, together with persons of high rank and great opulence, were seriously alarmed by the example which France had given of diminishing the power of the throne and of the altar, and destroying all privileges enjoyed by particular orders of men; and they feared that this system of innovation might proceed, as some of its wild votaries hoped, to overturn the safety of private property, while, at the same time, no European nation might be free from its contagion. It is not wonderful, therefore, that the princes of Europe combined against France on this occasion, or that they were supported by their clergy and their nobles. It remained to be seen, however, what part Great Britain would act in this important scene. Her church and her aristocracy were already reformed, and the first French reformers began their career by the avowed imitation of her example.

In forming a political constitution, the vanity of the French, which induced them to avoid the appearance of servile imitation, had unhappily led them to differ in one essential point from the British constitution. Their legislature consisted only of a king and a single house of representatives; whereas in Britain, by means of a third estate, that of the peerage, who are naturally jealous of popular innovation, laws injurious to the royal prerogative are prevented from being enacted, without the king being involved in any personal dispute with the commons. But, in France, the king himself was laid under the necessity, in such cases, of preventing the passing of the law, by personally exercising a negative voice; that is, he was placed in the unpopular and absurd situation of opposing his single judgment to the united will of a nation, and that too in the present perilous and critical times, when he could not fail to be suspected of disliking a constitution, by which his despotic power was taken away. Still, however, the representative government of Britain had radically been the model on which the French had proceeded; and there is no doubt, that they expected, during any contest in which they might be involved with the powers of the continent, that they would enjoy, if not the support, at least the neutrality and favourable countenance, of the British nation.

On the other hand, however, the passion for innovation which had seized the French nation, had, in many instances, proceeded to very extravagant lengths; and there was reason to fear, on the part of the court of London, that this passion might communicate itself in an inconvenient degree to Britain, where, though political abuses were comparatively trifling, and the passion would consequently find less food for its exertion, yet enough might exist to kindle disturbances and produce anxiety.

In the month of April 1792, a society was instituted in London, at the head of which appeared Mr Grey, Mr Baker, Mr Whitbread, Mr Sheridan, Mr Lambton, Mr Erskine, and several other members of parliament, for the express purpose of obtaining a reform in the representation of the people. The association assumed the popular title of the Friends of the People; and it was speedily joined by some very respectable characters in the commercial and literary world. Similar societies had, at former periods, existed in Great Britain; and the duke of Richmond, Mr Pitt, and others, while they were zealous advocates for the reform of parliament, had attended meetings, not merely of persons acting in their individual capacity, but, what was undoubtedly more dangerous, of persons appearing as delegates of other societies. At the present period, however, government, not without reason, appear to have regarded any association of this kind, as unusually dangerous. The society had resolved, that, early in the next session, a motion should be brought forward in the house of commons, for the reform of parliament, and that the conduct of the business should be committed to Mr Grey and Mr Erskine. In conformity with the intentions of the association, on the 30th of April, Mr Grey gave notice in the house, of a motion, which next session he intended to submit to their consideration, for a reform announced in the representation of the people. Its necessity, he said, had been admitted both by Mr Pitt and Mr Fox. The times were indeed critical, and the minds of the people agitated, but his object was to tranquillize them, by removing every cause of complaint. He requested gentlemen to consider the question in the interval, and hoped, that by the time the motion was brought forward, the sentiments of the people on the subject would be fully ascertained.

Mr Pitt rose with unusual vehemence. He said, he felt no difficulty in saying, in most decisive terms, that Mr Pitt objected both to the time and the mode in which this business was brought forward. He retained his opinion of the propriety of a reform in parliament, if it could be obtained by a general concurrence; but he feared at this moment, that if agreed on by that house, the security of all the blessings we enjoyed would be shaken to the foundation. The present, he alleged, was not a time to make hazardous experiments. Could we forget what lessons had been given to the world in a few years? or could men be supposed to regard the situation of this country as in any respect unfortunate when contrasted with that of others? He took notice of the new association, and the advertisements in newspapers, by which they invited the public to join the standard of reform. He said, he saw with concern the gentlemen to whom he alluded, united with others, who professed not reform only, but direct hostility to the very form of our government, who threatened an extinction to monarchy and everything which promoted order and subordination in a state.

Mr Fox declared himself satisfied concerning the necessity of a reform in the representation, but that he never entertained very languid hope of its accomplishment. He would repeat however what he had said almost the first time he addressed that house, that the greatest innovation which could be introduced into the constitution of England was to come to a vote that there should be no innovation in it. His name did not indeed appear in the list of the society for reform, because, though he saw great abuses, he did not see the remedy. Had his honourable friend consulted him, he should have hesitated in recommending the part he had taken; but having taken it, he could not see why the period was improper for the discussion. He professed strong attachment to the British constitution, but did Britain did not regard this as the only free country in the world. He noticed particularly the American states as in the enjoyment of practical freedom, and approved of the new constitution of Poland. After a tumultuous debate, in which Mr Burke and Mr Windham opposed Mr Sheridan and Mr Erskine, the subject was dropped.

In the mean time, a variety of political pamphlets were daily published, the most remarkable of which was a publication by Thomas Paine, entitled "The Rights of Man, part second." This was a direct and most inflammatory attack upon the whole principles and practice of the British constitution. Administration thought fit, on the 21st of May, to issue a royal proclamation against the publishing and dispersing of seditious writings; exhorting the magistrates to vigilance in attempting to discover the authors of such writings, and to preserve the peace and tranquility of the kingdom; and exhorting the people to guard against all attempts which aimed at the subversion of regular government.

It is not easy to perceive what precise purpose government intended to serve by this proclamation. The authors of the seditious publications alluded to did not conceal themselves, and the publications were openly sold without any attempt to suppress them by prosecutions. Perhaps it was intended to prepare the minds of men for these future measures of direct hostility against France, on which government had already resolved. Perhaps it was only meant to rouse and countenance, in the friends of government, a spirit of opposition to the proposals of innovation which were now afloat, or it might be intended in this way to try the general feelings of parliament and of the public upon the subject; but whatever object administration might have in view by this proclamation, its first effect was to excite a general spirit of political curiosity, and to serve as a public advertisement to the dangerous writings of Thomas Paine and others. In all parts of the island multitudes of persons, who had not hitherto interrupted their ordinary occupations to attend to the transactions of the continent, or the speculative discourses which the present state of France had excited, were now seen crowding to the shops of bookellers, inquiring for the treatises, the names or titles of which they knew not, against which the king's proclamation had issued. Every printing press in the kingdom was occupied, and copies could scarcely be supplied in sufficient abundance to satisfy the demand.

On the 25th of May, an address to his majesty being moved by the master of the rolls, in consequence of the proclamation, he intimated that the object of the proclamation was Mr Paine's works. He read an extract from one of his pamphlets, importing that all kings were tyrants, and their subjects slaves, and complained of the circulation of such publications. Mr Grey asserted, that the minister, apprehensive of the effects of the afflicting of the friends of the people, had concerted this measure with an insidious view of separating those who had been long connected. He pretended that such similar practices were delighted in by a gentleman, whose whole political life was a tittle of inconsistency, and who never proposed a measure without intending to delude his hearers. He said, that mode of proceeding against seditious writings was insufficient, irregular, and mischievous. If improper writings were published, his majesty's ministers ought to have prosecuted the authors or printers. Upwards of twelve months had elapsed since the publications now complained of made their appearance. What could they now say for themselves, or what could the public think of the conduct of the ministers of the crown, who had suffered these publications, which were said to be the bane of the public tranquillity, to poison the public mind for a whole year? He wished to know what could be the motives that brought forward at this time this sudden flow of ardour to subdue disorder. Had it always manifested itself in the conduct of ministers? Was there any remarkable activity displayed in preserving order in the affair of Birmingham, where there had been actual outrage and violence to the laws, to liberty, and order? Mr Fox disapproved of the proclamation, because it was insidious and ambiguous, tending to propagate vague and unnecessary alarm. Mr Pitt said he was far from imputing any ill design to the new association; but observed that it might be taken advantage of by ill-disposed persons, who under the shelter of a respectable body might push their own sinister designs. The plan of the persons to whom he alluded, was evidently to destroy the monarchy, and convert the kingdom into a republic. The address to the throne was agreed to without a division; and in the house of lords on the 31st of May a similar address was voted after some debate. Parliament was prorogued in a short time thereafter.

The eyes of all Europe were now turned towards France; and the combination which the kings of Europe were known to have formed against that country was expected speedily to proceed to action. The king of Sweden, who was fond of war, and had greatly distinguished himself in his late contest with Russia, having now settled all disputes with that state, offered to lead in person the armies of the combined powers, to destroy in France those new institutions and opinions which threatened to subvert the whole ancient system of public order in Europe. He still, however, continued in a state of extreme hostility with his disaffected nobles; and on the 16th of March he was affronted at a masquerade by an enthusiast, a nobleman of the name of Ankerfrioom, who boasted, when he was apprehended, that he had liberated his country from a tyrant. In the mean time, Leopold emperor of Germany had also died, and was succeeded by his son Francis II. Leopold had chosen to temporize with France, but his successor thought it unnecessary to observe any measures of caution. On some remonstrances being made by the French government against his permitting troops to assemble on the frontiers, he avowed the concert of princes against the constitution of France; and he stated it to be one of the conditions necessary to the preservation of peace, "That the neighbouring powers should have no reason for the apprehensions which arise from the present weakness of the internal government of France." This acknowledged intention to interfere in the internal affairs of the French nation, produced a proposal on the part of the French king to the national assembly, which was readily acceded to, for declaring war against the king of Hungary and Bohemia, and in a short time war was in like manner declared against Prussia and Sardinia.

In the mean while, though the combined princes had had not probably as yet completely adjusted the shares they were to receive of the spoils of France and Poland; yet that the latter might be retained in a state of weakness, and that all traces of the new principles which were at this time alarming the world, might as far as possible be obliterated, the empress of Russia gave notice to the king of Poland of her determination to invade that state with an army of 150,000 men, for the purpose of overturning the new constitution, which had been framed in imitation of that of Great Britain. No provision had been made by the king, who appears to have been a well-intentioned but a weak man, to resist such a force. An attempt was however made by Kościuszko, a Polish nobleman, who had served under General Washington in America, to defend the independence of the country. Some battles were fought, but the Russians continued to make progress; and on the 23rd of July, the king, despairing of the result of the contest, submitted without reserve to Russia, and consented to the restoration of the old constitution with all its weaknesses and anarchy. When this event took place, considerable numbers of persons in Britain were promoting a subscription of sums of money to assist the Poles to maintain their independence. The population of Poland was sufficient to have enabled it to resist the power of Russia; but the people at large were still the property of the nobles, and consequently illiterate, and incapable of exerting themselves with that union which is necessary to a great national effort.

While the combined princes were thus successful in the north, a very different train of events awaited them in France. The French king and his ministry directed the Austrian Netherlands to be invaded, but the object was accomplished in an unkindly manner. Four distinct detachments, under Lafayette and other generals, were directed to enter that country at different points. They made some progress; but their raw troops were speedily repulsed by the disciplined armies of Austria, which afterwards advanced with considerable force. At length Prussia and Austria, who had undertaken the extinction of the revolution in France, had completed their preparations, and the duke of Brunswick was appointed commander of the combined armies which were to enter that country. In a long manifesto issued by the emperor and the king of Prussia, they thought it necessary to disclaim all views of aggrandizement, or interference in the internal administration of France; but declared themselves resolved to re-establish in that country public security, with the ancient order of things, and to protect the persons and property of all loyal subjects. They threatened to punish in a striking manner, and to give up the city of Paris to most dreadful and terrible justice, if the least insult should be offered to the king, the queen, or the royal family. The duke of Brunswick also issued a manifesto, in his own name, on the 27th of July, at Coblenz, his head quarters, in which he declared that the two allied courts had no intention to make conquests from France; that they meant merely to deliver the king and royal family from captivity, and to restore his authority. The duke promised protection to all who should submit to the king. He required the national guards to protect the public safety till farther orders, and threatened to treat such of them as should resist him in arms as rebels to their king. He required, in like manner, the officers and soldiers of the French regular troops to submit to their legitimate sovereign. He declared the French magistrates responsible, on pain of losing their heads and estates, for every disorder which they should not have attempted to prevent. He threatened with death the inhabitants of towns and villages, who should dare to defend themselves against his troops, but promised protection to those who should submit. He called upon the city of Paris to submit instantly to the king, making personally responsible, on the pain of losing their heads, pursuant to military trials, all the members of the national assembly, and the magistrates and national guards of Paris; threatening on the word of the emperor and king, that if the palace of the Tuileries should be forced or insulted, or the least outrage offered to the king, queen, and royal family of France, or if they were not immediately placed in safety and set at liberty, to inflict the most exemplary and ever memorable avenging punishments, by giving up the city of Paris to military execution, and exposing it to total destruction: Lastly, I was declared that no other laws could be acknowledged in France, excepting those derived from the king when at full liberty; he was therefore invited to come to some frontier town, where he might provide for the restoration of order, and the regular administration of his kingdom.

This fatal manifesto was no sooner published, than all France was in commotion. The insolent language held quences of it by two foreign powers, one of which, Austria, had for ages been regarded with hereditary hostility, wounded the national pride and patriotic spirit of every Frenchman. Many who were the enemies of insurrection, the revolution, could not brook an attack upon the national independence; and the zeal of those who had been enthusiastic promoters of freedom was kindled into frenzy. From all quarters of the country, multitudes hastened to the frontiers, to share the danger of protecting the independence of their country. Unhappily for the monarch, Louis XVI, the enemies of the nation had loudly declared themselves to be his friends, and the restoration of his absolute power was made the excuse for a hostile invasion. The king, therefore, and all who were attached to him, became objects of public jealousy. A very small republican party had previously existed; every hour now procured to it an accession of strength, as it appeared dangerous to intrust the national defence in the hands of the king. He was, therefore, dethroned on the 10th of August. A republic was proclaimed, and the capital soon became the scene of a sanguinary massacre of those persons who had been imprisoned on suspicion of adhering to his cause.

The duke of Brunswick was, in the mean time, Duke of advancing into the country at the head of the combined Brunswick armies. Verdun and Longwy surrendered to his arms in the end of August, and he gradually advanced to the neighbourhood of Chalons. He had been opposed, however, at every step of his progress; the people of the country removed all kinds of provisions from the course of his march, while the French army under Dumourier was well supplied. At last, as the French daily acquired discipline, General Kellerman was able to sustain, with 16,000 men, an attack of 14 hours by a superior force. The combined army suffered by disease, while their adversaries were rapidly augmenting in in numbers and in courage, so that it became not a little dangerous to attempt to advance to the capital.

The king of Prussia was personally present with the combined army. We have already noticed the policy of that prince, or of his cabinet. He had resisted the combination of Russia and Austria to accomplish their own aggrandisement by dividing the territories of the Turks, and he had given countenance to the new Polish constitution, to form a barrier against Russia. Being defeated in his views by Britain upon the question concerning Oczakow, and finding France unable to give him any support, he had found it necessary to enter into the views of the two imperial courts; but he appears by no means to have regretted the discovery which he now made, that France was by no means in the prostrate state to which it had been supposed to be reduced; that she was capable of resisting an invasion, and was likely soon to resume her place among the European powers, and consequently, according to her ancient policy, to give countenance and protection to Prussia, and to repress the ambition of the court of Vienna. It may be farther remarked, that in consequence of Prussia being a Protestant state, and of the philosophical notions that had been diffused by the former monarch, Frederick II., many of the Prussian courtiers and military officers were not unfavourable to some of the principles of the French revolution, particularly to the overthrow of the Roman Catholic church. Neither was Prussia very jealous of political reforms, as it had countenanced the establishment of a free constitution in Poland, to affix her in resisting the restless ambition of Russia.

A retreat was begun by the combined armies, without any very desperate attempt being made to force the French to a general engagement, or to penetrate farther into their country; so that some suspicions were at this time entertained, by discerning men, that France would not have much to dread from the obstinate hostility of the king of Prussia. He probably wished to allow the new republic another winter, within which to establish a government for themselves. If they succeeded in their object, he would be safe against the future ambition of Russia and Austria. If they failed to acquire sufficient energy to defend themselves, he could return during the following summer, to take his share of their spoils. After his retreat, the French, with wonderful activity, commenced offensive operations. General Custine took Mentz in October. In the same month Dumourier invaded the Netherlands, and on the 4th of November, fought the celebrated battle of Jemappes, in which the Austrians were beaten; and, as the late emperor Joseph II., trafficking to his alliance with the royal family of France, had demolished the fortifications of the towns in the Netherlands, excepting Luxembourg and the citadel of Antwerp, the whole of that country, to the frontiers of Holland, now suddenly fell into the hands of the French.

At the battle of Jemappes, a new invention in the art of war, that of flying-artillery, is said to have been first put in practice by the French army. Like all other contrivances in the art of war, it derived much weight from its novelty; and as success in this terrible art depends greatly upon influencing the passions of mankind, by striking terror by what is unknown, or inspiring hope and confidence in consequence of any new device, this invention, at the period alluded to, made much noise in Europe. The French boasted greatly of the superiority which they derived from the use of it, and this boast was no doubt of some use to their enterprises. The invention itself is understood to have been made a short time before the battle of Jemappes, by the late Mr John Anderson, professor of natural philosophy in the university of Glasgow. He is said to have informed his friends in Scotland, that he offered the contrivance originally to the British government, at least to some persons connected with administration for the time, but that it was neglected by them. Being a man of an irritable temper, he was greatly enraged by this neglect, and instantly went over to France, where he communicated his contrivance to M. de la Fayette. Here he met with a very different reception. His experiments having been repeated by a committee of French engineers, the importance of the invention was instantly discerned; he was carefully by the most distinguished persons in the French capital, and considered as one of the most ingenious men of his age. He was seen looking from a window with Madame de la Fayette, on the day that the king was brought back to Paris after his unfortunate flight to the frontiers. His vanity appears to have been much gratified by the attention which, on this and other occasions, he received; and he remained during life an admirer and friend of the French revolutionary leaders. In the mean time, that people enjoyed the benefit of his invention, which on some occasions proved very fatal to their enemies; and the use of it is believed to have been only borrowed from them by the British army at a future period.

After the victory of Jemappes, the government of the new French republic, to conciliate the inhabitants of the Austrian Netherlands, published a resolution to open the navigation of the river Scheldt (which for some centuries had been kept shut up by the jealousy of the Dutch), and thereby to revive the trade of Antwerp, anciently one of the first commercial cities in Europe. At the same time to counteract, if possible, the combination of princes which had been formed against them, and which was now rapidly extending itself to every court in Europe, the new French convention (or representative body which had been elected after the deposition of the king) eagerly endeavoured to represent their own cause as the cause of mankind, or of the people at large in every country, in opposition to that of their princes or hereditary rulers, whom they denominated despots and tyrants. On the 19th of November the convention passed a decree, declaring, that they would give assistance, by their armies, to every people that should attempt to establish a free government for themselves. The same convention, two months thereafter, by a majority of votes, ordered their imprisoned monarch to be put to death on an accusation that he had betrayed the cause of the nation.

The important transactions which were taking place effects of on the continent could not fail to produce a powerful the continent effect upon the British nation, where the minds of men, as already remarked, had been directed in so particular a manner to political questions by the late royal proclamation. According to the different sentiments of men, they perused with terror, or with satisfaction, the duke of Brunswick's manifesto. Men of a patriotic... otic character, however, whatever their political opinions might be, were in general not dissatisfied to see a nation capable, amidst the utmost public confusion, of repelling an invasion by the best disciplined armies, conducted by the most experienced commanders, in Europe. The horrid massacres, however, which took place in September, together with the treatment of the royal family, excited very different sentiments, as exhibiting an instance of unparalleled barbarity and useless bloodshed. In consequence of the political publications which, by the months of August and September, had been universally read, the whole British nation was in a most agitated state. In all companies, political questions on the comparative merits of monarchical and republican government, together with the propriety of a reform in the British house of commons, formed the sole subjects of conversation. Persons of every rank and sex entered into these discussions with singular eagerness.

In general, at the commencement of the dispute, very few had any idea that a republican government would be found practicable in France. With regard to Britain, which enjoyed a sound administration of justice, and much internal prosperity, no change seemed necessary. In proportion, however, as the French gained victories, a republican government seemed less impracticable in such a country; and, in proportion, as the subject of political abuses was canvassed, new ideas concerning the state of government in Britain began to be entertained.—The disgraceful scenes of tumult and notorious corruption which had occurred in borough elections, the inattention of parliament during late years to the petitions presented for the abolition of the slave-trade, or motions made upon other popular topics, and last of all, the memory of the coalition, and the reproach under which the house of commons ever since that time had fallen, induced many persons to think a reform in the representation of the people absolutely necessary. As it is the nature of the human mind, when its attention is completely occupied on any subject, to proceed to extremes, new notions were daily broached at home, or imported from the volcanic region of France; one notion, in particular, was extremely prevalent, that of the boundless perfectibility of the human mind, which is so true in theory, but so false in fact; which, in the hands of providence, seems to be gradually and surely going forward, but which has never failed to cover with confusion all those who have hitherto attempted to act upon it as a present and exciting reality. At the period alluded to, however, when so many novelties were afloat, this notion gained singular favour. Men of science or benevolence, who judged of others from the rectitude of their own intentions; men of ardent imaginations, who believed every thing practicable to their unbounded zeal; together with the young and inexperienced, who were unacquainted with the imperfections of the human character,—all imagined, that the period was arrived when mankind, become rational and just, were no longer to engage in sanguinary wars of ambition; when good sense alone was to rule the world; and when the public business of society, reduced to the narrow limits of administering justice and constructing high roads and harbours, might be conducted with little trouble, and without the establishment of king and nobles, and different ranks and orders of men, or the display of military force for the preservation of public tranquillity. As these notions were extremely favourable to the common people, they entered into them with much eagerness, and thus contributed to give them a greater appearance of practicability. A sort of general delirium upon political subjects prevailed, and mankind were led to believe that the greatest changes in the order of society might be accomplished with facility and safety.

Besides the society called the Friends of the People, political and other associations of less distinguished persons, called societies, the Constitutional and Corresponding Societies, were established in London; and during the harvest, societies assuming the name of that of Friends of the People, were established in all towns and villages throughout the country, for the avowed purpose of accomplishing a reform of parliament. In proportion, however, as the character of the French people began to display itself, in the languid nature of their revolution, and the extravagant projects and sentiments which they published, persons of rank and property, as well as those of a mild and moderate disposition in Britain, became greatly alarmed lest something similar should occur in this country. In the month of November an association was instituted at the Crown and Anchor tavern in London, by Mr Reeves, the chief justice of Newfoundland, and other gentlemen connected with administration; the avowed purpose of which was the protection of liberty and property, against the attempts of republicans and levellers. Similar associations for the support of government were instituted in other parts of the metropolis, and throughout the country. These last included, in the course of the winter and succeeding spring, almost all persons of property in the island, besides great numbers of others who, from a spirit of timidity, or the desire of appearing the friends of the existing government, thought fit to join them, so that in point both of number or wealth it appeared, that comparatively, very few had formed a resolution to avow a desire of innovation at this period. In Scotland, where the literature generally diffused among the common people enabled them to obtain a full knowledge of the new notions then afloat, which their rank and situation in society induced them to regard with favour, it was found very easy to quiet the general ferment; because the same literature enabled them, by the perusal of newspapers and pamphlets, to see the universal combination of persons of rank and property that was formed against the opinions which had recently gone abroad.

Parliament was assembled on the 13th of December Parliament 1792. The speech from the throne intimated, that assembled his majesty had judged it necessary to embody a part hastily of the militia, and to assemble parliament previous to the time fixed for that purpose. It stated, as the cause of speech of these measures, the seditious practices which had been from the discovery, and the spirit of tumult and disorder thrown thence, in acts of riot and insurrection, which required the interposition of a military force in support of the civil magistrate. The industry, it added, employed to excite discontent on various pretexts, and in different parts of the kingdom, appeared to proceed from a design to attempt the destruction of our happy constitution, and the subversion of all order and government, and that this design had evidently been pursued in connection and concert with persons in foreign countries. Britain, countries. His majesty asserted, that he had carefully observed a strict neutrality in the present war on the continent, and had uniformly abstained from any interference with respect to the internal affairs of France; but that it was impossible for him to see, without the most serious uneasiness, the strong and increasing indications which had appeared there of an intention to excite disturbances in other countries, to disregard the rights of neutral nations, and to pursue views of conquest and aggrandisement, as well as to adopt towards his allies, the states general, measures which were neither conformable to the law of nations, nor to the positive stipulations of existing treaties. Under all these circumstances he felt it was indispensable duty to have recourse to those means of prevention and internal defense with which he was intrusted by law; and thought it right to take some steps for making some augmentation of his naval and military force, being persuaded, that these exertions were necessary in the present state of affairs, and were best calculated both to maintain internal tranquillity, and to preserve the blessings of peace.

An address, in consequence of the speech from the throne, having been moved, as usual, in the house of commons, Lord Wycombe opposed it. He said the speech calumniated the people of England; that no insurrection existed; that the kingdom was on the contrary overflowing with loyalty; that speculative political opinions had always been agitated under the free constitution of Britain; and that the persons thought most disaffected, wished to reform that constitution. He apprehended we had no just cause of war at present; for he considered the opening of the Scheldt, or even the protection of the stadtholder's privileges, as no sufficient justification of such a measure. Mr Fox said, that the present was the most momentous crisis, not only that he had ever known, but that he had ever read of, in the history of this country; and that the conduct of parliament, depended not merely the fate of the British constitution, but of doctrines which go to the happiness and well-being of all human kind. He alleged, that there was not one fact asserted in his majesty's speech, which was not false. He denied the existence of an insurrection; remarking that though the sailors at Shields, Yarmouth, and other places, had entered into riots for an increase of wages, nobody had alleged that they had any political object in view. He justified the joy which many persons had expressed, on account of the retreat of the duke of Brunswick; and asserted, that this did not imply, in the minds of such persons, the existence of a dislike to the British constitution. One extreme, said he, naturally leads to another; those who dread republicanism, fly for shelter to the crown; those who desire reform, and are calumniated, are driven by despair to republicanism, and this, said he, is the evil that I dread; these are the extremes into which these violent agitations hurry the people, to the gradual decrease of that middle order of men, who dread as much republicanism on the one hand, as they do despotism on the other. He described the calling out of the militia, as a fraud, intended to induce the people to believe, that great cause of alarm existed, and thereby to bring them more completely under the influence of government. He treated the opening of the Scheldt, as no just cause of war, and said, he did not believe that it would ever be the real cause, though it might be the pretext. He said, that such a war would undoubtedly aid the object of republicans and levelers; and recommended the removal of acknowledged grievances, as the certain means of appeasing discontent among the people. He, therefore, moved an amendment to the address, which simply pledged the house, to make inquiry into the facts stated in his majesty's speech.

Mr Windham now deserted the opposition, and joined administration, in contending that great danger to the constitution existed. He declared his approbation of the march of the combined armies into France, because he believed their motives to be good. Mr Dundas asserted, that under the pretext for reform, the example of France had been held out for imitation to the people of this country; that the object of the French evidently was the aggrandisement of their dominions. He said the interests and honour of this country, required that we should protect Holland, in the right of keeping the Scheldt shut, and thereby convince it, that it was happier to be connected with Great Britain, than with France. He took notice of the invasion of Poland, that had been alluded to in the debate; and said, that if there had not been such a division in that house, on the subject of the Russian war, Poland would have escaped her present fate. Mr Sheridan denied the existence of any just cause of alarm, and said, that he should vote that English minister to be impeached who should enter into a war, for the purpose of re-establishing the former despotism in France, or should dare, in such a cause, to spend one guinea, or shed one drop of blood.

From the commencement of Mr Pitt's administration, a considerable number of members of parliament, from the remnant of the coalition, had remained in opposition to his measures. At this time, however, in consequence of the alarm which had diffused itself among persons of high rank, and perhaps also in consequence of a plausible excuse being found for defeating a fruitless and unprofitable opposition, of which they were weary, a great number of the members of the party hitherto hostile to administration, now joined in supporting those measures which they perceived to be agreeable to the executive power. On a division there appeared for the address 270; for the amendment 50. On the following day, when the address was reported by the committee appointed to prepare it, Mr Fox moved an amendment, the object of which was to prevent a war. He remarked, that some gentlemen had said, that ministers ought sooner to have taken the alarm, and sooner interposed to guard against the ambitious designs of France. He also thought, that they ought to have armed sooner, but not for the purpose of joining the general confederacy against France, but of countering it. They should have armed, the instant they heard that the two great military powers of Germany had confederated, and resolved to enter France; they should have opposed any such invasion, because it must have been productive of great injury to Britain, and to the other states of Europe, had it been attended with success. He said, he was an enemy to the aggrandisement of France; but in opposing it, he would take care to have justice on his side. Had he been minister when Prussia and Austria resolved to invade that that country, he would have told those powers they had no right to enter France. Had this been done, the English must have acquired such an influence in the councils of that nation, as would have completely prevented any attack upon Holland. He contended, that, in case of a war, the mutual jealousies of Austria and Prussia would render them unfeeling allies; nor was Holland to be trusted, on account of the existence of a strong party, hostile to the stadtholder. Mr Burke compared the new French republic to the system of Mahomet, who, with the Koran in one hand, and a sword in the other, held out the former to the acceptance of mankind, which the latter compelled them to adopt as their creed; and asserted, that the two states of France and Britain might already be considered as actually in a state of war. Mr Dundas defended administration for not having meditated on the invasion of France by Austria and Prussia. He admitted, that the successes of the French had been incredibly great; but he noticed the emptiness of Dumourier's military chest, and the expenses daily increasing; comparing them with the situation of this country, and pronouncing confidently that the war must be successful and glorious. Mr Fox's amendment was negatived without a division.

In the house of lords, similar debates took place upon the address, and opposition experienced a similar defection of a part of its members. The duke of Norfolk, the marquis of Lansdowne, Lord Rawdon (since earl of Moira), and Earl Stanhope, declared themselves adverse to war; while Lord Grenville, Lord Stormont, the marquis of Townshend, and others, supported the sentiments expressed in the king's speech.

After the French king had been dethroned, Earl Gower the British ambassador was recalled; but the French ambassador, M. Chauvelin, still continued to reside in London. On the 15th of December, Mr Fox moved, that a minister should be sent to Paris, to treat with the provisional executive government of France. He declared, that by this motion, he meant not to approve of the conduct of the French government, but simply to record it as his opinion, that it was the true policy of every nation to treat with the existing government of every other nation, with which it had relative interests, without regarding how that government was constituted. He said, we could have no stronger objection to the existing government of France, than to the government of Algiers and Morocco, where we have consuls. This motion gave rise to a very animated debate, in which the present opposition were accused of wishing to encourage discontent and sedition, and were defended by Mr Taylor, Mr Grey, and Colonel Tarleton. Mr Jenkinson enlarged on the flourishing state of our finances, while the French were involved in enormous expense; that the period for going to war was favourable; that the disaffected party in this country was very small; and, in the mean time, that the ambition of the French nation was daily increasing, and the ambition of a nation was more dangerous than that of a king. He considered the protection of the Dutch, in their claims to prevent the navigation of the Scheldt, as a just cause for going to war; and said, that by sending an ambassador to Paris, we should offend those who were to be our allies, the king of Prussia and the emperor. Mr Fox's motion was negatived.

On the 19th, Lord Grenville introduced into the house of lords, what has been called the alien bill, which authorized government to dismiss from the kingdom such foreigners as they might think fit. It passed bill after some opposition from the earl of Lauderdale and the marquis of Lansdowne. During its dependence, the latter nobleman ineffectually proposed an address to his majesty, to enter into a negotiation with the existing government of France, for the purpose of averting the fate of Louis XVI.

On the 28th of December, Mr Secretary Dundas urged the house of commons to pass the alien bill, on account of the extraordinary influx of foreigners into the country, and on account of the dissatisfaction of persons at home. Sir Gilbert Elliot supported the bill, and declared his regret on account of being under the necessity of differing from his former political associates. Mr Burke, as usual upon the subject of French affairs, spoke with great violence. He said, he would give the bill his most cordial support, as being calculated to keep out of England those murderous atheists, who would pull down the state and church, religion and God, morality and happiness. The bill, he said, was intended to drive from this country murderers and assassins. At one part of his speech, he drew a dagger from under his coat, and with much vehemence of action, cast it on the floor. This, said he, pointing to the dagger, is what you are to gain by an alliance with France; wherever their principles are introduced, their practice must also follow; you must guard against their principles; you must proscribe their persons. I vote, said he, for the present bill, because I consider it as the means of saving my life, and all our lives, from the hands of assassins. When they smile, I see blood trickling down their face; I see their insidious purposes; I see, that the object of all their cajoling is blood. I now warn my country to beware of those execrable philosophers, whose only object is to destroy every thing that is good here, and establish immorality and murder by precept and example.

Hic niger eft, hunc tu Romane cavete.

While the alien bill was still under consideration, another measure allied to it in principle was introduced. This was a bill to prevent the circulation of assignats and other paper money, under the authority of France. The object of the bill was to make payments made in this way illegal, even when accepted. During the month of December, an order of council was issued for preventing the exportation of corn to France, and some ships which had grain on board were compelled to unload. On the 26th of December, an act of indemnity passed upon the subject.

Affairs were now hastening to an open rupture with Lord Grenville. On the 17th of December, M. Chauvelin wrote and transmitted a note to Lord Grenville, one of the secretaries of state, in which, in the name of the executive council of the French republic, he demanded to know whether his Britannic majesty ought to be considered as a neutral or a hostile power. He said, that no wish existed on the part of France, to entertain any doubt upon the subject. That they even wished to answer previously all those reproaches which might be thrown out against them. Notice was taken of the decree of the French convention of November 19th, which it was alleged had been misinterpreted; that the French republic did not intend to favour insurrections in neutral or friendly states, and that the decree applied only to those people, who, after having acquired their liberty, might request the assistance of the French republic, by a solemn and unequivocal expression of the general will. A promise was made that the neutrality of Holland should be respected, while that power confined itself on its part within the bounds of strict neutrality.

With regard to the question of opening the Scheldt, it was a question irrevocably decided by reason and justice, of little importance in itself, in the opinion both of England and Holland, and which could not seriously become a cause of war. It was added, however, that on the fatal supposition of a war being resolved on, while the intentions of France were thus peaceful and conciliatory, the whole weight and responsibility of it would sooner or later fall on those who had provoked it.

Lord Grenville's answer to this note, which bears date 31st December 1792, disclaims considering M. Chauvelin in any other public character than that of minister from his most Christian majesty. His lordship denied, that the decree of 19th November was satisfactorily explained, as the promoters of sedition, in every country, might still have in view the cases in which they might count beforehand on the support of France. The neutrality of Holland was said to be already violated by a French officer, who had navigated the Scheldt, to attack Antwerp; that the unimportance of the Scheldt would only render the opening of its navigation a clearer proof that an intention existed to insult the allies of England, by violating their rights which were guarded by the faith of treaties.

An official note of the executive power of France was transmitted through M. Chauvelin in reply to Lord Grenville's answer, in which an attempt was made to justify their former explanation, or to explain farther the obnoxious decree of November 19th. All intention of making a conquest of the Netherlands was disclaimed; and it was added, that if the Belgians, through any motive whatever, should consent to deprive themselves of the navigation of the Scheldt, France would not oppose it. In an answer to this note by Lord Grenville, these explanations were declared unsatisfactory. On the 17th of January, M. Chauvelin sent to Lord Grenville his letters of credence, as an ambassador from the French republic. On the 20th of the same month, Lord Grenville sent him a letter, refusing to receive his credentials, or to consider him in any other character than that of one among the general mass of foreigners resident in England. On the 24th of January, Lord Grenville sent to M. Chauvelin a passport for himself and his suite, declaring that, after the fatal death of his most Christian majesty, he could no longer be considered as holding any public character in Britain.

In consequence of this correspondence, the French convention declared war against England and Holland on the 1st of Feb.; and in the mean time, on the 28th of January, Mr Secretary Dundas presented to the house of commons a message from the king, stating that copies of the papers now mentioned, were laid before the house. It was added, that his majesty thought it necessary to make a farther augmentation of his forces by sea and land, and, that he relied upon the zeal of the house of commons to enable him to take the most effectual measures for maintaining the security of his own dominions, for supporting his allies, and for opposing the ambition of France, at all times dangerous, and particularly so, when connected with the propagation of principles utterly subversive of the peace and order of all civil society.

Thus Britain became a party in the most sanguinary and eventful war that Europe ever saw. We may here attempt to remark, that, in the month of April, the French government made an attempt to enter into a new negotiation. The minister (Le Brun), transmitted to England by a private gentleman letters to Lord Grenville, to be delivered by Mr John Salter a notary in London, in which he requested passports for M. Maret to come to Britain to negotiate peace; but no public notice was taken of the application.

In the quarrels of nations, the real sources of hostility are often very different from those that are often publicly held out to the world. It was for some time causes of animosity to dispute in Great Britain, with much eagerness, the question concerning who were the aggressors in this war. In such disputes the friends of administration were under great difficulties, in consequence of the narrow ground upon which government had thought fit to rest the grounds or causes of hostility. The French government had been willing to explain away the offensive decree of the 19th November, and the question about the Scheldt they were willing to give up. It would seem, that their total ignorance of the nature of the British constitution, and of the elements which influence it in practice, prevented them from entertaining any idea that they were likely to encounter hostility from this country in consequence of their revolution. Hence they not only neglected their navy, but they had already, in some measure, ruined it, by sending their seamen to the frontiers in the character of soldiers. But though the French had originally no hostile designs against this country, and though the ostensible causes of war on the part of Great Britain were weak, it by no means follows, that the motives which actually influenced the conduct of the British government, on this occasion, were of the same nature. France had been the ancient and the dangerous enemy of England. She had suddenly fallen into a state of anarchy and consequent debility. All Europe was now league against her. Within she was divided by faction, and without she was afflicted by immense hosts of the best disciplined soldiers in Europe, conducted by the most skilful leaders, to whom she had nothing to oppose but an undisciplined multitude, led on by low-born and inexperienced chiefs. In this state of things, it seemed a very safe measure to make war against her. To do so, was only to retaliate the conduct she herself had recently observed, when she accomplished the dismemberment of the British empire, by afflicting our revolted colonies. It now seemed practicable, by dismembering France, to render her forever incapable of being dangerous to Britain.

But the most powerful incitements to this war undoubtedly arose from the example of political innovation, which it was so much the interest of every government in which there existed any mixture of hereditary authority, completely to defeat and overwhelm. To comprehend the full force of this motive for going to war, it is necessary to have lived in these times, to recollect the ferment which universally prevailed in the minds of men, and to imagine the situation and the feelings of a prince, who, though still safe himself, yet saw, in his immediate vicinity, the first of European monarchs, of the most ancient race, and at the head of the mightiest kingdom, hurled from his throne to a prison, and from that prison to a scaffold; his power assumed by the means of his subjects, who justified their own conduct as the triumph of reason and of freedom; their minds inflamed by furious zeal, devoting to destruction whatever retarded their career; while, at the same time, the contagion of their sentiments extended itself into neighbouring kingdoms, and from the licence of speech and of publication allowed in Britain, produced a vehemence of discussion, which threatened to break out into actions not less violent than those of the primary revolutionists of France. In this state of things, and under the influence of such sentiments, a war against France seemed to be a war in defence of the whole arrangements of society, whether civil or religious; and princes and nobles considered themselves as engaged in the protection, not merely of their rank and riches, but of their personal safety. By engaging in war, the hands of government would be strengthened, in consequence of the patronage produced by the expenditure of public money, and of placing the patriotic sentiments of the people, or the wish to defend their own country, in opposition to the feelings of sympathy, with which they were disposed to regard the efforts of the French leaders in establishing a republican constitution, and defending their national independence.

Still, however, there were not wanting at that time some individuals, who thought the war altogether unnecessary to the support of the British constitution and government. The great amount of the national debt, together with the patronage of the crown, and the general happiness and integrity of character which the admirable jurisprudence of England produces in the people at large, gave powerful assurances of stability to government, and safety to property. Even before the war commenced, the crimes committed by the French revolutionists had greatly diminished the popularity of their cause; while the associations on the side of government that were forming throughout the kingdom, demonstrated the superiority of its adherents in wealth and numbers. It was therefore thought by a few persons to be completely practicable to weather the storm, without having recourse to war, especially as the body of the people of Great Britain were at this time entire strangers to the military art, and completely destitute of arms, while a considerable standing army was in the hands of the crown. The example of the American government, which, though weak in itself, and totally destitute of a standing army, while the people, as individuals, were all possessed of arms, and though greatly disturbed at this time by the admirers of the French revolution, yet, under the virtuous administration of George Washington, contrived to preserve its neutrality, affords some countenance to this idea. There were even some who doubted the prudence of the war, notwithstanding the strength of the combination formed against France, and who suspected, that in a sanguinary and desperate contest, such as this was likely to prove, armies led on by princes, brought into power by the casualty of birth, might prove no match for French enthusiasm in the first instance, and far less ultimately for the superior tactics and enterprise which must speedily be introduced, by men rising to command in consequence of the admiration produced by their talents and their success. Last of all, we have already remarked the opinion suggested by Mr Fox, that Great Britain ought, on this occasion, to have actively protected the independence of France, which would have given such an ascendancy over her councils, as would have enabled us to protect Holland, perhaps to preserve the life, and even the sovereignty, of Louis XVI.; and, at all events, would have enabled us speedily to terminate the war, without any important changes being suffered to take place in the relative strength of the continental states of Europe.

It is to be observed, that at the close of the year 1792, Mr Pitt did not attend parliament when it first assembled; nor did he make his appearance in the house of commons till the alien bill was going through its last stages in January, after the first debates were ended, and the relative strength of parties had appeared. The offensive cause of his absence was, that having obtained, on the death of Earl Guildford (Lord North), the place of warden of the cinqueports, and thereby vacated his seat as a member of the house of commons, he had gone to Cambridge to secure his re-election. The length of his absence, however, suggested to some persons a suspicion, that he was hesitating about engaging to support the court in going into the war. Mr Dundas, in the meanwhile, who, during Mr Pitt's administration, had usually left the entire management of every debate to the premier, though he had acted otherwise when supporting Lord North's ministry, stood forth in the house of commons, as the leading servant of the crown, in support of the proposal for engaging in the war. Mr Pitt, however, on his return, resumed his station in the debates of the house, and supported the present measure with the utmost ardour. In the mean time, it is to be remarked, that, at this period, Lord Thurlow was removed from the office of lord-high-chancellor, and was succeeded by Lord Loughborough, who had originally owed his preferment to the support given by him to Lord North's administration and measures, and who had hitherto adhered to opposition, but in the late debates had defended the plans of administration.

On occasion of the message from his majesty announcing the actual declaration of war by France, Mr Pitt stated, that his majesty had always declined taking any part with regard to the internal government of France; and, during the summer, while France had been engaged in war with Austria and Prussia, his majesty had in no form departed from his neutrality; but as the French seemed now determined to subjugate other nations to their principles, he was under the necessity of interfering for the protection of his own allies, the Dutch, who had not indeed made any formal requisition for assistance, but to whose government the French had at all times been notoriously hostile. Mr Pitt also represented the language of the men in power in France, as intolerably menacing towards the government. Britain, and as dangerous, from its tendency to introduce anarchy. He read an extract from a letter, written by one of the French executive council, and addressed to all the friends of liberty in the French sea-ports: "The king of England and his parliament mean to make war against us. Will the English republicans suffer it? Already these free men show their discontent, and the repugnance which they have to bear arms against their brothers the French. Well, we will fly to their succour; we will make a descent on the island; we will lodge there 50,000 caps of liberty; we will plant there the sacred tree, and we will stretch out our arms to our republican brethren: the tyranny of their government will soon be destroyed." Mr Pitt also adverted, in strong terms, to the death of the French king as a calamitous event; an act of outrage to every principle of religion, justice, and humanity; an act, which, in this country and the whole of Europe, had excited but one general sentiment of indignation and abhorrence, and could not fail to produce the same sentiments in every civilized nation. He compared it, and other late proceedings, to the massacre of St Bartholomew. It was, he said, in all its circumstances, so full of grief and horror, that it must be a wish, in which all united, to tear it, if possible, from their memories; to expunge it from the page of history; and remove it for ever from the observations and comments of mankind.

Excidat ille dies ævo, neu posteræ credant Secula? Nos certe taceamus, et obruit multa Nocte tegi nostræ patiamur crimina gentis.

All the members who remained in opposition, concurred in reproving the conduct of the French revolutionists. Mr Fox, however, asserted, that the general maxim of policy was, that the crimes committed in one independent state could not be cognizable by another. He alleged, that the topics adverted to by Mr Pitt, were introduced into the debate to blind the judgment, by exciting the passions; and he contended, that the opening of the Scheldt, and the decree of the 19th of November, which were stated as the causes of the war, could never justify such a measure. He censured our past neutrality as unfair. While the French were invaded, we were quiet spectators; but, on their becoming invaders in their turn, we said Europe was in danger, and interfered against them. With respect to the general situation of Europe, he said, we had been scandalously inattentive. We had seen the entire conquest of Poland, and the invasion of France, with such marked indifference, that it was evident the professed causes were not the real grounds for going to war. He asserted, that the real cause, always disfavored by our government, but ever kept in mind, was the internal government of France. The destruction of that government was the avowed object of the combined powers. We were about to join them; but we were ashamed to own that Britain was engaging to aid the restoration of despotism; and therefore the Scheldt and Holland were collusively had recourse to as pretexts.

In the house of lords, when the same subject was discussed, the marquis of Lansdowne contended, that, by sending an able and experienced minister to Paris, our government might have saved the life of Louis XVI. He said, the war would be a wanton war on our part, without provocation on the part of France; and he highly disapproved of the insulting manner in which M. Chauvelin was dismissed. Various debates afterwards occurred, in which both parties eagerly disputed the question, whether the French or the British were the aggressors in the war.

Though from the expensive nature of modern wars, Great commerce, a great commercial nation, in consequence of its wealth and credit, is enabled to engage in them with considerable advantage; yet, on every such occasion, it makes an immense sacrifice of individual happiness. The derangement of great branches of trade, and the disappointment of commercial speculations, never fails to reduce to instant ruin vast numbers of manufacturers and merchants, while many thousands of their dependent labourers, suddenly deprived of bread, are under the necessity of enlisting as soldiers; a circumstance, which is indeed attended with conveniency to government, but is productive of much wretchedness, for a time, to the families of such persons. At the period of which we are now treating, the British commerce had become extremely extensive, and, in consequence of the commercial treaty, the British and French merchants had become closely connected. From the sudden stagnation of trade, which the war now produced, added to the alarms which had been excited upon political subjects, a general paralysis appeared to seize the country, and the number of bankruptcies exceeded all that had ever happened in the most calamitous times. A general stoppage of commercial credit took place. No bank would venture to advance money to merchants or manufacturers; the consequence of which was, that many of them, with large quantities of goods in their possession, were unable to make effectual the smallest payment. To apply a remedy to this alarming evil, several of the principal traders and merchants waited upon Mr Pitt, and requested the interference of government; which was granted. A select committee of the house of commons was appointed to investigate the subject. After consulting with a variety of bankers, manufacturers, and merchants, the committee, on the 29th of April, gave a report favourable to the solicitation of the merchants for relief.

A bill was accordingly introduced, on the 1st of May, authorizing government to issue five millions by exchequer bills, in loans to such merchants and manufacturers, as should deposit goods in security for the sum advanced. The measure proved extremely salutary. When it was found that the traders could obtain money from government, the bankers, and all other persons, immediately became willing to advance them money, or give credit to their bills; the consequence of which was, that not one half of the exchequer bills was ever issued. Trade gradually revived, and new channels were by degrees found out, for the disposal of the productions of British industry.

On the 27th of March, Mr Pitt, in a committee of the house of commons, stated that he had borrowed sovereigns for the service of the present year 4,500,000l. The terms of the loan were, that for every 72l. advanced to the public, the lenders should be entitled to 100l. stock, bearing an interest of 3 per cent. which would make a capital of 6,210,000l. the interest of which, to be paid by the public, would amount to 186,000l. a year. He said, there was another charge attending the loan; for, by the act for appropriating the million surplus to a sinking fund, it was provided, that whenever a new loan should be made, a fund equal to one per cent. on the whole of it must be provided, and applied to the liquidation of it. This would require an annual charge of £62,100l., making in the whole, including the interest, £48,400l. per annum.

On the 15th of March, the attorney-general brought forward a bill for preventing traitorous correspondence with the king's enemies. It was the intention of this bill, to prohibit the sale to the French government, or the French armies, of arms, military stores, provisions, or clothes, under the penalty of high treason. The purchase of lands in France was also prohibited. No person was allowed to go from this country into France, without a licence under his majesty's great seal, under the penalty of being accounted guilty of a misdemeanor. Persons, though subjects of this country, coming from France, were prohibited to enter the kingdom without a passport, or, at least, without presenting to the master of the vessel, a declaration to be transmitted to the secretary of state, and that, in the meantime, they should not quit the place where they had landed, without the permission of a justice of peace, or finding security for their good behaviour. Lastly, the insurance of vessels, either coming from France or going to France, was prohibited. The bill was opposed as unnecessary, because the ancient English treason laws prohibit the supplying of the king's enemies with naval or military stores, and because there was little danger of British money being conveyed to France, in the present distracted state of that country. It passed through both houses, supported by great majorities.

During the present session, a very great number of petitions were presented to the house of commons, from different parts of the country, praying for a reform in the representation. On the 6th of May, Mr Grey brought forward the question, after presenting a petition, which had been framed by the association called the Friends of the People in London, and which had a very numerous subscription annexed. He asserted, that the number of petitions now brought forward, demonstrated, that the house of commons were not the real representatives of the people. He gave a detailed statement of the various defects in the representation; and, as a specimen of the mode of argument now maintained upon the subject, it may be remarked, that when Mr Grey came to take notice of burgage tenures, and the splitting of messuages and hereditaments, for the purpose of multiplying voters, contrary to an act of King William for preventing such practices; he quoted an opinion given judicially by Lord Thurlow, when sitting as chancellor in the house of lords, in an appeal cause from Scotland, respecting the right of voters at elections. His lordship said, "If the right of election could be tried by law, in a court of law in England, he was convinced that an English court of law would not be satisfied with such a mode of election, as this, that a nobleman's steward should go down to a borough with ten or twelve pieces of parchment in his hand, containing each the qualification for a vote, and having assembled a sufficient number of his master's tenants round a table, should distribute among them the parchments, then propose a candidate, and afterwards collect these parchments, and declare his lord's friend duly elected for the borough. These elections Lord Thurlow called a mockery." Mr Grey, after asserting that a considerable part of the representation of England was in this defective state, and urging the necessity of a reform, concluded, with moving that the petition should be referred to a committee. A very animated debate ensued, which was adjourned, and renewed on the following day. The proposal of reform was chiefly opposed on account of the hazard attending it, which appeared from the example of France, and on account of the length, universal suffrage, to which its more ardent partizans out of doors wished it to be carried. Mr Pitt, in a speech of considerable length, explained his former motives for being friendly to a parliamentary reform, and his objections against it at the present moment. If this principle of individual suffrage (pointed at in several of the petitions) was to be carried to its utmost extent, it went, he said, to subvert the peerage and to depose the king, and, in fine, to extinguish every hereditary distinction, and every privileged order, and to establish that system of equalizing anarchy, announced in the code of French legislation, and attested in the blood shed in the massacres at Paris. "The question then," added Mr Pitt, "is, whether you will abide by your constitution, or hazard a change, with all that dreadful chain of consequences with which we have seen it attended in a neighbouring kingdom."

Mr Fox, on the contrary, represented in strong terms, the inconsistency of Mr Pitt's present conduct with his former professions. As to the time of attempting a reform, he said, it had been proposed at all periods, in war and in peace; but they had all been represented as improper. The present, he contended, was not a more dangerous period than the year 1782, when Mr Pitt himself had brought forward a similar proposal. Mr Fox said, he had always disliked universal representation as much as the chancellor of the exchequer, but that dislike was no reason for charging it with more mischief than was fairly imputable to it. He denied that it had been the cause of all the evils which had occurred in France. These he ascribed to the councils, generally unwise, and often wicked, by which that country had recently been governed. Mr Grey's motion was rejected, upon a division of 282 against 41.

We have already remarked, that during some preceding years, the people at large took a very considerable interest in the question concerning the abolition of the African slave-trade, and that great numbers of petitions had been presented to the house of commons, during every session, praying that it should be prohibited. During the present session, however, no such petitions were brought forward. In consequence of the French revolution, and of the dread of innovation at home, the greater number of the original enemies of this traffic had been deterred from opposing it; lest they should give countenance to the diffusion of a popular question, by which a dangerous enthusiasm might at this critical time be excited. The remaining enemies of the trade, being also zealous advocates for a reform of the parliamentary representation, had resolved to drop all inferior questions, and Britain, to concentrate their strength upon that single point, assuring themselves, that if the house of commons should once be elected in a manner in any degree approaching towards universal suffrage, every popular question would thereafter be easily carried. The subject being thus in some measure deserted by the people at large, Mr Dundas did not account it necessary to revive the propositions, by which, on the part of government, during the former session, he had endeavoured to moderate the views of the opponents of the trade.

On the 14th of May, however, Mr Wilberforce moved for leave to bring in a bill, for abolishing the trade carried on by English merchants, for supplying foreign territories with slaves. The motion was carried by a majority of 7; but as it was not to take effect for some years, according to the resolution of the house in the preceding session, Mr Wilberforce moved, that leave be given to bring in a bill, for limiting and regulating the importation of slaves into the British West India colonies, for a time to be fixed in the act. This motion was also carried, by a majority of 35 against 25. The bill proceeded through a first and second reading, but was rejected on the 12th of June, by a majority of 31 against 29.

During the present session, certain popular measures were adopted. On the recommendation of Sir John Sinclair, a gentleman who of late years had been extremely active, in calling forth a spirit of attention to the improvement of the domestic productions of the island, £3000 per annum was voted by the house of commons, for the establishment of a board of agriculture. This institution has been the means of collecting and conveying to the public much useful information respecting that most valuable of all arts. At the same time, the institution is believed to have suffered from the unpropitious effect of political influence, which is so apt to injure the utility of every British establishment; and after the removal from its head of its original proposer, which happened in a few years, in consequence of his opposition to Mr Pitt's measures, it lost much of its utility. As it possesses little patronage, and has no special business allotted to it, there seems to be danger that it may sink into insignificance.

In consequence of a motion of the lord advocate of Scotland, Robert Dundas, Esq., a bill was in the month of April brought into parliament, for the relief of the Roman Catholics of Scotland. The persons of that proscribed sect were still incapacitated by law from holding or transmitting landed property, and were liable to other very severe restrictions. These were now removed by a bill which passed without opposition. The passing of this bill was at the present period a popular measure, although a dozen of years had scarcely elapsed, since the people of Scotland had almost universally, and with the utmost violence, combined to oppose any relaxation of the penal laws against the Catholics. But one of the favourite notions of all political reformers at this time, was that religion ought to have no influence upon government; that religion, or our duty to God, is a subject about which men are only interested as individuals, and concerning which society has no right to interfere. On the other hand, the opposers of every kind of innovation, were disposed to regard the Catholics with a favourable eye, as the adherents of an ancient system, which reproved all novelties, and tended to inspire the utmost reverence for established authority.

The inhabitants of the north of Scotland were successful, by the assistance of Mr Dundas, in obtaining a repeal of the duty on coals carried coast-ways, as far as respected that part of Great Britain: but the cities of London and Westminster were less fortunate, in a similar attempt, to procure a repeal of the taxes paid by them on the same article; as the minister would not agree, at the commencement of a war, to relinquish a tax which amounted in this case to a considerable sum.

At this period the exclusive charter of the East India Company being within a year of expiring, that company presented a petition for a renewal of it. On the 23rd of April the subject was considered in the house of commons. Mr Dundas introduced the business by observing, that the proposal he was about to make of a renewal of the charter was undoubtedly attended with considerable difficulties. "No writer upon political economy," (said he), "has as yet supposed that an extensive empire can be administered by a commercial association, and no writer on commerce has thought that trade ought to be shackled with an exclusive privilege. In deviating from these principles, which have been admitted and admired, I am sensible that my opinions have popular prejudices against them: but I am supported by successful experience; and when the house adverts to the peculiarities of the subject before them, they will at once see, that I am not attempting to overturn theories, though I am unwilling to recede from old and established practice. It would be idle, and a proof of ignorance, to maintain, that all the advantages that Great Britain possesses from its connexion with India, arise out of the present exclusive privilege of the company; but it would be impossible to say what might be the political or commercial effects of a variation from the present system." Mr Dundas then stated, that the shipping employed by the East India Company amounted to 81,000 tons; that the seamen navigating those ships were about 7000 men, who had constant employment; that the raw materials imported from India for the use of home manufactures amounted annually to about 700,000l.; that the annual exports of British produce and manufacture to India and China in the Company's ships, amounted to upwards of a million and a half sterling. He stated, that great difficulties would attend any alteration of the present system of government in India, especially from the effects which the innovation might have on the minds of the natives. He therefore proposed a variety of resolutions, the most material of which was; "That it appears to be fit and proper to continue to the East India Company their exclusive trade, within the limits now enjoyed by them, for a farther term of 20 years, to be computed from the 1st of March 1794, liable to be discontinued at the end of such a period, if three years notice shall previously be given by parliament; subject, nevertheless, to the regulations herein after specified for promoting the export of goods, wares, and merchandise, of the growth, produce, or manufacture of Great Britain or Ireland, and for encouraging individuals to carry on trade to and from the East Indies." The regulations referred referred to, permitted the export and import of certain commodities in the company's ships, at a stated freight. The resolutions proposed by Mr Dundas having been carried, a bill was brought forward, and passed through both houses, with little opposition, for renewing the East India Company's charter.

The trial of Mr Hastings still proceeded, though very slowly, and was now totally disregarded by the public. A petition was presented to the house of lords on the 18th of April, from Mr Hastings, complaining of "the enormity of the delays which have attended his long protracted trial," and earnestly entreating, that their lordships would adopt such means as might seem best calculated to accomplish the end which the petitioner so anxiously solicited, viz., a close of the trial during the present session of parliament. Mr Hastings had addressed the court on the 27th of February, to the same effect, but the business was not at this time brought to any conclusion.

During this year, government endeavoured to strengthen itself by erecting barracks in the neighbourhood of all the great towns in the island; that, by residing there, the folderies might be removed from the hazard of receiving the contagion of popular opinions. A considerable degree of political fermentation still prevailed in the minds of the people, which, however, was rapidly subsiding. In England a bookseller was prosecuted, and punished with imprisonment, for selling the second part of Paine's Rights of Man; and one or two individuals, of low rank, were committed for seditious words. In Scotland, the public attention was much excited by the prosecution of two gentlemen, Mr Thomas Muir, a member of the faculty of advocates, and Mr Fyche Palmer, a member of the university of Cambridge, who acted as a unitarian minister at Dundee. Mr Muir had been extremely active during the autumn of the preceding year, when the political agitation was at its height, in promoting associations about Glasgow and its neighbourhood, for the avowed purpose of procuring a popular reform of the representation in the house of commons. His talents as a man of letters were only moderate, but he possessed the faculty of unpremeditated elocution in a surprising degree; and he appeared to be influenced in a great measure by the vanity of haranguing without end, which the daily meetings of these societies afforded him an opportunity of doing. In other respects he was no way formidable, possessing little knowledge of the world, and still less discernment of the human character. He injured the cause he meant to promote, by constantly collecting numerous assemblages of common people, first at Glasgow and afterwards at Edinburgh, which gave an appearance of disorder and turbulence to the state of society, that was extremely alarming, not merely to government, but to persons who, in other respects, might have been disposed to favour the political sentiments which he avowed, but who were intimidated by the events which were passing on the continent of Europe, and by the unsettled appearance which affairs were thus made to assume at home.—Mr Palmer was a man of more literary talents. He attended political societies, but without making any remarkable efforts in them. He was tried before the circuit court of judiciary, on the 17th of September, some months after Mr Muir's trial at Edinburgh, and found guilty of publishing a political libel, which had been written by some other person, but which he had corrected, and ordered to be printed. Both of these gentlemen were condemned to transportation, Mr Muir for fourteen and Mr Palmer for seven years, to such place beyond seas as his majesty should think fit to appoint; and they were accordingly sent to Botany Bay. The severity of these sentences excited considerable discussion. The crime with which they, the condemned parties, were charged was, that of sedition or leafling-making, or public libel; the express punishment for which is prescribed by the law of Scotland, to be fine, imprisonment, or banishment. As it is a rule in law, that penal statutes are to be strictly interpreted, it was doubted how far the punishment of transportation could be inflicted under a statute which points out, in general terms, banishment as the punishment of the offence. The ancient practice of the Scottish courts was undoubtedly favourable to the extensive and more severe interpretation now adopted.

Not intimidated by these trials, a few persons of no public or political importance whatever, met at Edinburgh in the month of November, and thought fit to call themselves a British convention. They mimicked the proceedings of the French national convention as closely as possible, saluting each other with the title of citizen, holding public fittings, admitting strangers to the honours of the fittings, &c., and mingling the solemn with the ridiculous in a most singular style. At any other period their conduct would have excited nothing but ridicule. At this time, however, it was considered in another light, as some of the members were brought to trial, and punished with the same severity that had been exercised towards Muir and Palmer.

To promote the success of the war, a convention had been signed in the spring between our court and treaties, that of Peterburgh, stipulating for the protection of hostilities till the French should relinquish all their conquests. A treaty was soon after concluded with the landgrave of Hesse Cassel, for a subsidiary body of 8000 men; a number which, by a subsequent agreement, was extended to 12,000. The king of Sardinia engaged (for 200,000l. per annum) to keep up an army of 50,000 men, to be employed in the particular defence of his dominions, and in general service against the enemy. A compact of alliance was adjusted with Spain, one with Naples, and others with Prussia, Austria, and Portugal. Besides the stipulations of vigorous hostility, it was agreed, that the conduct of other powers should be watched with extraordinary circumspection in this case of common concern to every civilized state, lest they should abuse their professed neutrality by protecting the commerce or property of the French.

We refer the particular detail of the military transactions of this most eventful contest for the article France, to which we refer the reader. We may here observe, however, that during the present campaign, the independence of France seemed at one time to be brought into considerable hazard. The faction that overturned the monarchy, assembled a convention of national representatives, and was endeavouring to establish a republican form of government, soon divided. Britain. ed itself into two parties. The leading party at the first establishment of the republic consisted chiefly of men of letters, who were led by their speculations to expect a wonderful amelioration of the human character, and of the state of society, from the changes they were producing. They wished to avoid sanguinary measures at home, and to restore tranquillity to their country as speedily as possible. These men, however, appear to have been deficient in activity, as well as in knowledge of the character of their countrymen. They were opposed by a turbulent and ferocious minority, led by Robespierre, Danton, and other men of a most unprincipled and sanguinary temper. The moderate and ruling party were deceived by many of those whom they employed; and at last their chief commander, Dumourier, having been repulsed in the Netherlands by the united forces of Austria, Prussia, and England, entered into a negociation with these powers for the restoration of monarchy in France. The negociation was rendered abortive by the fidelity of his army, almost the whole of which deserted their general, and refused to bring the independence of their country into hazard by allowing foreign armies to interfere in the arrangement of its internal government.

The defection of Dumourier, together with the repulse of their armies, brought the moderate party, which still ruled in the French convention, into great difficulties; and it is perhaps a most unfortunate circumstance, that the British government did not seize that opportunity of making peace with them. The hazard of innovation was now over in Britain. One of the maxims of the first French republicans was the love of peace and hatred of war. The unsuccessful issue of the attempt which they had made to penetrate into other countries might have remained long upon their minds, and added force to this sentiment. The tranquillity of Europe might thus have been insured during a considerable period. A mild party would have been preferred in power, an influence obtained by Great Britain over their councils, and the sanguinary scenes would have been avoided which afterwards occurred in the interior of France, and upon the frontiers. This opportunity of making peace, however, was unhappily disregarded, and nothing less was expected from its distraction within, and the immense combination of force assailing it from without, than the complete subjugation of that country. The want of success in their military operations at last encouraged the antagonists of the more moderate French republicans to attempt their overthrow by an insurrection of the common people of Paris. The national representatives were in this way subdued. Ninety members of the convention were imprisoned, and the minority were enabled to convert themselves into an apparent majority. By this event all France was thrown into confusion. The authority of the convention, thus mutilated, was rejected by the whole of the south of France, and the royal or national harbour of Toulon, with its fleet and stores, surrendered, by negociation, to the British admiral, Lord Hood, as trustee for the next heir of the monarchy. In the western parts of France, the standard of royalty was reared, and joined by immense multitudes, who adhered to it with the most obstinate bravery, and were not subdued till after a greater expense of blood than was found necessary for the results of the combined armies of Europe.

On the part of Britain the general plan of a war of such magnitude and supposed importance does not seem to have been well contrived, or properly carried into effect. A great part of the western coast of France was in full possession of the royalists, while, at the same time, the British navy commanded the ocean. It was therefore an easy enterprise, at a time when Britain had an opportunity of taking into pay so many foreign troops, to have landed a great army on the French coast, to have assisted the royalists, and advanced along with them through an open country, destitute of fortified towns, to the capital, against a convention whose authority was scarcely acknowledged by one-third of the nation. Instead of this mode of proceeding, the combined armies advanced against the French Netherlands, and wasted the summer, as well as their own strength, in the siege of a few of the powerful fortresses which defended that frontier. Thus the attack upon France was actually made upon its strongest side, that is to say, in the most injudicious manner possible. Leisure was given to the convention to establish its authority at home, and to call forth immense levies for the defence of the country, so that before the close of the year the tide of success was turned in their favour. Toulon was retaken, and the Spaniards beaten in the south; while on the northern frontier, the British army was repulsed before Dunkirk, and the commander in chief of the allies, the prince of Cobourg, before Maubeuge. The duke of Brunswick and Prince Wurmser were driven across the Upper Rhine near Mentz, within the last fortnight of the year, after a succession of sanguinary conflicts, in which the French, by fighting every day in succession, and daily bringing forward fresh troops, who had been allowed to repose on the preceding days, at last succeeded with their raw levies, in wearing down the strength and the courage of their veteran enemies.

The British parliament assembled on the 1st of January 1794. In the speech from the throne his majesty jealously called the attention of the two houses to the issue of the war; "on which," he observed, "depended the support of our constitution, laws, and religion, and the security of all civil society?" to the advantages that had attended our arms both by land and sea; and the expectation of ultimate success, as the operations of our enemies were alone derived from an arbitrary system, which enabled them unjustly to dispose of the lives and properties of the people, which must necessarily introduce internal discontent and confusion. His majesty proceeded to state the impossibility of making peace upon the only grounds on which it ought to be concluded, the permanent safety of the country, and the tranquillity of all other nations. He noticed the treaties and conventions into which he had entered for this object with foreign powers; and mentioned the general loyalty which prevailed amongst all ranks, notwithstanding the continued efforts to mislead and seduce the people. He lamented the necessity of additional burdens upon the people, but noticed the favourable state of the revenue.

As usual, the topics mentioned in the king's speech became the subject of debate, both in the house of lords lords and in the house of commons, but they excited little attention throughout the nation. Men of property, in general, had been so much alarmed by the events which occurred in France, that they accounted it absolutely necessary to repose implicit confidence in government; and as administration seemed resolved not yet to despair of success in the war, they received full support from the approbation of the public. A minority, indeed, existed throughout the country, by whom the war was openly disapproved of; but as they consisted in general of persons of little influence, they could in no way embarrass the measures of administration. By this minority, the debates in parliament were as little regarded as by the supporters of government. They had no confidence in that assembly, in consequence of the inconsiderable number of the members that remained in opposition; and the memory of the coalition between Lord North and Mr Fox, together with the moderate and correctly constitutional nature of the principles supported by Mr Fox, deprived this statesman of the confidence of the more ardent lovers of political innovation, and rendered his eloquence of little value in their estimation. Indeed there was something in the form which the parliamentary debates generally assumed during the present war, which tended to render them uninteresting. It was understood by the public, that the war was undertaken for the purpose of subduing the political principles adopted by the French leaders; but these principles, notwithstanding the extravagant length to which they had been carried, and the absurdities and the crimes which had been committed under pretence of them by the ruling factions of France, still, at bottom, bore such a resemblance to some fundamental maxims of the British constitution, and to the principles for which our ancestors so earnestly contended, that the members of administration seem to have accounted it imprudent to avow in their public speeches, that the war originated in the purpose which their friends out of doors considered as its radical object. They were unwilling to say, that they wished to encroach upon the independence of a neighbouring state, or to prevent its establishing a representative government; and chose rather to allege that the war was occasioned by the direct aggression and ambition of the French, in attempting to establish their dominion over other nations, and that our object in it was merely to obtain indemnity for the past, and security against such aggression for the future. As opposition possessed considerable advantages from this equivocating mode of defending the war, every debate was apt to turn into this channel, and the same arguments were continually repeated without any person being convinced.

On occasion of the king's speech, Lord Wycombe moved an amendment to the usual address of thanks, recommending pacific measures. Lord Mornington, on the other hand, who was one of the principal supporters of the address, contended that the alternative of war and peace did not at present exist. Before we could relinquish the principles on which the war commenced, proof was necessary, either that the opinions which we had conceived of the views of France were erroneous; that the war was become desperate and impracticable; or that, from some improvement in the system and principles of the French, the justice and necessity which prompted us to commence the war no longer existed. His lordship ascribed to France unlimited views of aggrandizement; ambition connected with principles subversive of all regular government. In support of his opinion, he adduced the act of fraternity, the assumption of sovereignty in Savoy and the Netherlands, the opening of the Scheldt, and the apparent designs of hostility against Holland. That such were the motives his lordship contended from a pamphlet written by M. Brissot, the conduct of the French residents in America and Constantinople, and the scheme of emancipating and arming the negroes in the West Indies. From all these proofs, his lordship declared himself fully convinced of the original justice and necessity of the war. He was so pleased, notwithstanding the late reverses, with the general result of the campaign, that he entertained confident hopes of ultimate success. He considered the foundations of the French power as so unsound, and the new government as so weak, that the effect of the confederate arms would soon be triumphantly striking. He acknowledged, that the enemy had displayed extraordinary vigour and energy; but he was convinced that power obtained by a system of terror would not be permanent. He opposed a negociation as unlikely to be effectual in the present circumstances, and advised the continuance of the most resolute exertions of hostility.

Mr Sheridan, in reply to Lord Mornington, affirmed that Great Britain had acted with no less disregard of the independence of neutral states than the French; that we had endeavoured to compel Genoa, Switzerland, and Tuscany, to join the confederacy against France, by the most insulting menaces; and that, as far as prudence would permit, we had assumed the same language towards Sweden and Denmark. He said, that if the French system of fraternizing with other nations that wished to overturn their own internal government was a just cause of war, their dereliction of that system ought to be a reason for making peace. He denied that the French were the original aggressors. "I am affronted," said he, "that the minister who sits near the noble lord, does not himself feel it necessary to his own dignity to oppose this paltry argument of the act of aggression having come from them, instead of leaving that talk to us, to whom comparatively the fact is indifferent. When he hears this called a war of necessity and defence, I wonder he does not feel ashamed of the meanness which it spreads over the whole of his cause, and the contradiction which it throws among the greater part of his arguments. Will he meet the matter fairly? Will he answer this one question distinctly? If France had abstained from any act of aggression against Great Britain, and her ally Holland, should we have remained inactive spectators of the last campaign, idle, apart, and listening to the fray; and left the contest to Austria and Prussia, and whatever allies they could themselves have obtained? Does he then mean to say that he would have sat still; that Great Britain would have sat still with arms folded; and reclining with luxurious ease on her commercial couch, have remained an unconcerned spectator of this mighty conflict, and have left the cause of civil order, government, morality, and religion, and its God, to take care of itself, or to owe its preservation to the mercenary exertions of German and Hungarian barbarians; provided only that France had not implicated Great Britain by a special offence, and forced us into this cause of divine and universal interest by the petty motive of a personal provocation? He will not tell us so: or if he does, to answer the purpose of the hour, will he hold the same language to our allies? Will he speak thus to the emperor? Will he speak thus to the king of Prussia? Will he tell them that we are not volunteers in this cause; that we have no merit in having entered into it; that we are in confederacy with them only to resent a separate insult offered to ourselves; which redressed, our zeal in the cause at least, if not our engagement to continue in the alliance, must cease? Or if he would hold this language to those powers, will he repeat it to those lesser states, whom we are hourly dragging into this perilous contest, upon the only plea by which such an act of tyrannical compulsion can be attempted to be palliated, namely, that a personal ground of complaint against the French is not necessary to their enmity; but that as the league against that people is the cause of human nature itself, every country where human feelings exist, has already received its provocation in the atrocities of this common enemy of human kind? But it is unnecessary to ask whether he would hold this language to the greater powers. The king of Prussia, Sir, at this moment, tells you, even with a menacing tone, that it is your own war; he has demanded from you a subsidy and a loan; you have endeavoured to evade his demand, by pleading the tenor of your treaty of defensive alliance with him, and that as the party attacked, you are entitled to the whole of his exertions; he denies that you are the party attacked, though he applauds the principles upon which you are the aggressor; and is there another power in Europe, to whom our government will venture to refer the decision of this question? If what I now state is not the fact, let me see the minister stand up and contradict me. If he cannot, let us no longer bear that a fallacy should be attempted to be imposed on the people of this country, which would be treaty with scorn and indignation in every other corner of Europe. From this hour, let him either abandon the narrow ground of this being a war of necessity entered into for self-defence, or give up the lofty pretence of its being a war of principle, undertaken for the cause of human nature." Mr Sheridan admitted, that enormities had been committed in France, which disgusted and sickened the soul. This was most true; but what relation had these to England? And if they had, what did it prove? What but that eternal and unalterable truth, that a long-established despotism so far degraded and debased human nature, as to render its subjects, on the first recovery of their rights, unfit for the exercise of them? But, he said, he should always meet with reprobation the inference from this truth, that those who had long been slaves ought ever to continue so. That we and all the powers of Europe had reason to dread the madness of the French, Mr Sheridan agreed; but was this difficult to be accounted for? Wild and unsettled as they must necessarily be from the possession of such power, the surrounding states had goaded them into a paroxysm of madness, fury, and desperation. We called them monsters, and hunted them as monsters. The conspiracy of Pillnitz, and the brutal threats of the abettors of that plot, had to answer for all the additional horrors that had since disgraced humanity. We had covenanted for their extermination, and now complained that they turned upon us with the fury that we had inspired. The same speaker asserted, that no reasonable hope of success existed upon which we ought to be led. "What," said he, "was the state of our allies when we entered into the confederacy? The force of Austria unbroken, though compelled to abandon Brabant, and the power of the veteran troops of Prussia absolutely untired, though the seas and disease had induced them to retire from Champagne. What is their state now? Defeat has thinned their ranks, and disgrace has broken their spirit. They have been driven across the Rhine by French recruits, like sheep before a lion's whelp, and that not after the mishap of a single great action lost, but after a succession of bloody contests of unprecedented fury and obstinacy. Where now is the scientific confidence with which we were taught to regard the efforts of discipline and experience, when opposed to an untrained multitude and unpracticed generals? The jargon of professional pedantry is mute, and the plain sense of man is left to its own course." Mr Sheridan asserted that the efforts of the inferior states, the Dutch, the Portuguese, the Italians, whom we had compelled to enter into the war, had been of no importance, and he alleged that government had conducted the contest with little vigour or ability.

Mr Windham combated the opinion, that the enormities committed in France were the effects of the war. It was, he said, the duty of every government to interfere, for France was making war against all government, all religion, and all principle. How was it possible to preserve peace with a nation which formed a ground for quarrel with every government that dared to suspect the purity of their intentions? Whatever might be understood as the binding law upon nations carrying on offensive war, with respect to interfering in the internal affairs of other countries, he conceived that such opinions could not affect a nation sustaining a defensive war. "Standing (said Mr Windham) as we do, the defenders of the present and the future world, ought we meanly to crouch in cowardice, and sink in despair."

Mr Dundas defended the management of the war and the activity which had been employed by government in it. Our seamen in the beginning of the year were only 15,000; in the course of the war 34,000 men had been added. At the commencement of the war, we had only 13 ships of the line and 30 frigates fit for service; at the present time we had 80 ships of the line and 100 frigates in actual employ, which, with the armed vessels now in the service of the public, made the whole above 300 sail. In augmenting the army, the most effectual and economical system had been pursued; besides the militia, 30,000 men had been added to the army. He concluded, that more had been done in the first year of this, than of any former war; and added, that upon the issue of this struggle, every thing that was valuable to us, either as individuals or a nation, depended.

Mr Fox repeated in a variety of forms the assertion that we were the aggressors in the war. He contended, that every state had a full right to regulate its internal government; government; and asserted, that the manifesto of the duke of Brunswick had occasioned all the excesses of the French. Upon the subject of acts of aggression previous to the war, he thought, that this difference between the conduct of the parties subsisted; France was always ready to negotiate, while the British government invariably refused. The former expressed the strongest dislike to war, and took every step to avoid it. The latter not only showed an inclination for war, but endeavoured to inflame and provoke hostilities. He contended, that the nature of the conduct of the French government towards this country, afforded no good reason for a continuance of hostilities, and no rational objection against the permanency of any treaty that might be concluded with them. We negotiated with Louis XIV., though his pretensions were no less dangerous to this country, than those of the present French leaders. That monarch was a declared enemy to our revolution. He corresponded with the Jacobites of England. He endeavoured to overturn our establishment in church and state. He invaded Holland, and confined not his projects of conquest to the banks of the Rhine. Mr Fox said, we ought to be satisfied with the best security for peace, that the nature of the circumstances in which it was made would permit, taking care that the power with whom it was made should have no temptation to break it. He denied, that the prodigal manner in which the French government conducted their affairs, and the confusion and ruin into which their finances were hastening, afforded any prospect of success to the allied powers. He said, he remembered, that during the American war, there was much talk of a vagrant congress, which was nowhere to be found, of their miserable resources, and their wretched paper money at 300 per cent. discount, of which, with any few halfpence you had in your pocket, you might purchase to the amount of 100 dollars. The Americans were represented, as exercising on each other the most intolerable tyranny, on the royalists the most unheard-of cruelty; and it was then said, that if such principles were suffered to exist, if the cause of America was ultimately successful, there was an end of all civilized government; England must be trodden in the dust. "Yet then (said this statesman), I recommended negotiation, and lived to see Great Britain treat with that very congress so often vilified and abused, and the monarchy remain in sufficient vigour. God grant that I may not see her treat with the present government of France in circumstances less favourable for making peace than the present." He reproved the conduct of administration, in endeavouring to compel the weaker states to join them in the war, while, at the same time, they were inveighing against the French, as invaders of the rights of nations. He concluded with a most splendid panegyric upon the superior dignity which appeared in these times in the character and conduct of the illustrious General Washington, who, for the preservation of his authority, as first magistrate of a free people, had not recourse to tricks of policy or arts of alarm, but depended upon his own wisdom, moderation, and firmness; which enabled him to preserve the neutrality of America, without fear of the contagion of the French revolution, or of the threats of British hostility.

Mr Pitt recapitulated the arguments formerly used, to prove that the aggression had certainly taken place on the part of France. He mentioned the system adopted by the French as subversive of all regular government, their usurpation of foreign territory, their hostile intentions against Holland, and their unprecedented views of aggrandisement and ambition. Unless it could be proved that we had mistaken these principles, we were bound, he said, to continue the war; and supposing that difficulty and disappointment had occurred in the prosecution of it, these ought to inspire us with additional vigour, and stimulate us to new exertions. Had there been any misconduct, of which he was not sensible, in conducting the war, yet that could not affect the general question. If the difficulties we had experienced, arose from the want of abilities in those to whom the management was entrusted, let us resort to other men. If the difficulty arose from the nature of the contest, then the argument against ministers would be much weakened. He stated the objects of the war to be, to procure a secure and permanent peace, and an indemnity for the expenses incurred. To accomplish these ends, he asserted the necessity of interfering in the internal affairs of France, and he vindicated this measure upon the ground of securing our own safety. He conceived there was not the least probability of the continuance of the present government of France. The efforts of the people had been merely the result of terror. They were supported by the most desperate resources, which could not possibly continue. He said, that peace with the present French government was less desirable to him than war, under any disasters which he could possibly imagine. He admitted, that a safe and advantageous peace ought to be concluded, as soon as it could possibly be obtained; but he affirmed, that the security and benefits of peace with France must depend upon the establishment of a government essentially different from the present. He asserted, that had Louis XIV. succeeded in his projects, what we should have suffered from him would have been a deliverance, compared with the consequence of success attending the present French system. He said he did not attach the same degree of importance to the restoration of monarchy in France, as to the destruction of the present system. He attached importance to the former, only as a form of government in which the greater part of the people would be disposed to concur, and which would afford the best security for the permanence of peace. He noticed, as precluding all negociation, a late decree of the French convention declaring the unity and indivisibility of their republic, in the enumeration of the territories of which they included their late conquests. He concluded with saying, that there could be no question but to resist, till such time as, by the blessing of providence upon our endeavours, we might secure the independence of this country, and the general interests of Europe. The address was carried by a majority of 277 against 59.

In the house of lords, a similar debate took place upon the same occasion. Lord Stair moved the address, and the motion was seconded by Lord Auckland, in the house with speeches which recited in strong terms the atrocities committed by the French factions upon each other, together with the successes of the British troops under the duke of York and elsewhere. These noblemen were supported by the duke of Portland, Earl Spencer, Lord... Lord Coventry, the earl of Mansfield, the earl of Hardwicke, the earl of Carlisle, Lord Grenville, and others. They were opposed by the earl of Guildford, who proposed an amendment to the address, recommending negotiation, and by the duke of Norfolk, the earl of Derby, the earl of Lauderdale, Earl Stanhope, and the marquis of Lansdowne. Earl Mansfield asserted, that the war was begun by the unprovoked aggression of France; and continued on our part, not from the motives of ambition and conquest, but to restore the blessings of order and good government to that country, to resist and defeat the wild attempts of those, who had declared it to be their purpose to disorganize Europe, and who were the enemies of the whole human race. He said that a lasting peace with France would be impossible. No alliance could be made with anarchy. The government of France was continually fluctuating, and the leaders of the present faction were not likely to respect any engagements formed by their predecessors. Other noblemen supported the necessity of persevering in the war, to avoid breaking faith with foreign powers, and as the only means of preserving the independence and the constitution of this country; while, on the other hand, the marquis of Lansdowne contended, that the speech from the throne had discovered an important secret, that this was a war for nothing, or which had no specific object in view. He ridiculed, with much success, the difficulty of treating with the French, because they had no government, or were in a state of anarchy. Let the ministers, said his lordship, ask General Wurmser if there is no existing government in France. Let them ask the duke of Brunswick and the king of Prussia. Let them ask Lord Hood and Sir Gilbert Elliot, the royalist army of La Vendee, the unfortunate Lyonele, the Spaniards retiring before their arms. He feared it would not be long, before the prince of Saxe-Cobourg and the duke of York must allow that there was a government in France. The horrid outrages perpetrated in France, he considered as chiefly owing to the delusive hopes entertained by the royalists, of assistance from this country. The earl of Lauderdale regretted the consequences, which, by the management of ministers, the war was made to produce upon the situation of the people of this country. He asserted, that the alarm spread by ministers had been made the ground for a system of persecution. The revolutionary tribunal had been regarded with horror and disgust; but what had been the conduct of the courts of justice in this and a neighbouring country? What their sentences? Who could venerate a constitution, which must be protected by the friend becoming a spy on the actions of his neighbour, and the house of domestic conviviality being subjected to a state inquisition? His lordship discussed at some length the severities exercised in Scotland, and ascribed the revolution in France to the severity of punishments and the oppression of the poor. "Does the minister then (said his lordship), take the way to prevent the introduction of French principles, when he embarks in a war which weighs down the people with taxation; and introduces a system of severity, which must make them detest, not admire, the constitution of Great Britain?" The address was carried in the house of lords, by a majority of 97 against 12.

Several debates of a similar nature occurred during the course of the session; but as the issue of the whole was the same, and the arguments employed did not differ essentially from those now mentioned, it is unnecessary to state them in detail.

It is one of the remarkable characteristics of the British nation, to be at all times easily thrown into a state of great anxiety and alarm, by any object which goes to excite fear in the mind of the people. The two greatest objects of political terror, fear of foreign invasion, and the dread of secret conspiracies, are always present in the minds of the people. It is true, that during many ages Britain has not been successfully invaded, and that, since the time of the Spanish armada, no such attempt has been made by any of those governments with which Britain has engaged in hostility; but this very circumstance, which leads reflecting persons to regard such a project as extremely unlikely to occur at any particular period, seems to produce a contrary effect upon the people at large. The evils attending invasion having never been felt, lay hold of their imaginations in the wildest and most exaggerated forms; and from the terror thus produced, they are prevented from reflecting upon the difficulties attending such a project, which deterred Louis XIV. from attempting it while in the height of his power, and possessing the advantage of a disputed succession to the crown. Such is the credulity of the British nation upon this head, that administration can at any time throw them into a state of the utmost consternation, by expressing an apprehension of a French invasion. From this alarm, ministers usually derive considerable advantages. The voice of faction is silenced for a time by patriotic terror, and all parties are under the necessity of arranging themselves under the banners of government for the defence of their country.

The dread of plots and conspiracies produces effects of somewhat similar. It is true that no conspiracy of plots. Englishmen was ever productive of danger to the government, while it remained even tolerably popular; but this never prevents the nation from being thrown into the utmost consternation, by intimations, on the part of government, that some desperate conspiracy is secretly carrying on, and is ready to burst forth, to the utter destruction of the public tranquillity.

During the war of which we are now treating, Mr Pitt's administration derived incredible strength from these two sources of terror; the fear of invasion, and the dread of conspiracies by disaffected persons. Neither did he want skill to profit by them. At the commencement of the war, it had been believed by most persons, and perhaps by government, that it would be of short duration, as the state of anarchy which succeeded the overthrow of the monarchy in France, seemed to render that country an easy prey to the powerful armies by which it was invaded. When any doubt of success was expressed, it was said, that after making trial of the war for a year, we might desist, in case we were unsuccessful. But the original state of affairs was now considerably altered, by the successes of the French at the end of the late campaign. The British government still resolved to persist in the war; which, however, was now becoming less popular, as less likely to be attended with success. On the other hand, the French leaders were greatly irritated by the persevering persevering hostility of the British ministry, and amidst the pride of victory, menaced England with invasion. It is evident, that they had still too much business upon their hands on the continent, to be able to make the slightest attempt to carry their threats into execution; but the British administration, taking advantage of the threat, expressed their fears that it might be successful; and proposed the arming of associations of volunteers, both cavalry and infantry, throughout the island, for the defence of the nation, both against foreign invasion, and also against the efforts of disaffected persons at home. They also encouraged the raising of subscriptions to defray the expense of these armed associations; and although the measure was disapproved by the minority in parliament, as an unconstitutional mode of raising money, it was supported by the majority. An act was passed, authorizing the embodying and training of volunteers, and the measure was carried to a considerable extent throughout the country.

In like manner, though the political ferment occasioned by the French revolution had now considerably subsided, and the alarm occasioned by it was gradually passing away, administration, aware of the strength they derived from keeping the country in a state of anxiety upon political subjects, announced to parliament, by a message from the king on the 12th of May, that seditious practices had been carried on by certain societies in London, with a view to overturn the constitution, and introduce the system of anarchy that prevailed in France; that their papers had been seized, and were submitted to the consideration of the house. On the same day, Thomas Hardie, a shoemaker in Piccadilly, who had acted as secretary to the London Corresponding Society, and Daniel Adams the secretary to the Society for Constitutional Information, were apprehended for treasonable practices, upon a warrant from Mr Dundas. Mr Horne Tooke, well known for his ingenious philological writings, as well as for the political part he formerly acted in the turbulent days of John Wilkes, with the reverend Mr Jeremiah Joyce, Holcroft a dramatic writer, Mr Kyd a barrister, and John Thelwall, who had for some time entertained the town in the character of a political lecturer, were in a few days arrested and committed to the Tower on a charge of high treason.

A secret committee of the house of commons was chosen by ballot, for the sake of giving solemnity to the inquiries made into this conspiracy. The members of the committee were the friends of the minister. The report of the committee, concerning the alleged conspiracy, amounted to little more than a recital of a number of advertisements from societies, or accounts of their debates, that had previously appeared in the public newspapers. It served, however, as a reason for suspending the operation of the habeas corpus act, and thereby enabling ministers to prevent any political movement, or avowed disapprobation of their measures, from being rashly exhibited out of parliament.

In the mean while, the fear of invasion, added to the political alarm, which, previous to the commencement of the war, had diffused itself through the country, and which was thus artfully maintained, conferred upon ministers a degree of strength, which for a century or two no British administration had possessed. Almost all men of property were their adherents. Their antagonists sunk into utter discredit, and suffered a very severe degree of persecution in every department of society; so that it became dangerous to a man's prospects in the world, and in ordinary business, to express the slightest doubt of the propriety of any measure approved of by government.

In the early part of his administration, Mr Pitt had endeavoured to raise his reputation, in a considerable degree, upon the improvement of the finances, and the hope which he held out of paying off the national debt. He now deserted all such views; and taking advantage of the uncontrolled power he possessed at home, and the pliability of parliament, he engaged in a career of unexampled expenditure, in corrupting successive parties in France, or in the management of the war. No opposition was made to a demand of 85,000 men for the maritime service; but the increase of the army to 60,000 men was resisted by opposition, though the majority allowed that number. The whole supply of the year exceeded 20,228,000l. As a loan was negotiated for 11,000,000l.; spirituous liquors, glass, bricks, paper, and other articles were subjected to new duties; and an additional revenue was drawn from attorneys.

From its first rise to eminence, as an European Prussian power, the Prussian court considered France as its politics protector against the ambition of Austria. We have remarked, that, at the period of which we are treating, Prussia had entered with reluctance into the ambitious views of Austria and Russia for the partition of Poland and France. Having found it necessary to do so, however, for the sake of sharing in their acquisitions, the Prussian court appears to have conducted itself with singular prudence and dexterity. During the present year, in spite of the resistance of a party in Poland, headed by the brave Kościuszko, that country was partitioned, and Prussia obtained an ample share of its territory. The partition of France was an object from which Prussia had every thing to fear, as it would destroy that power, by which Austria, the inveterate enemy of Prussia, had at all times been kept in awe. When the Prussian monarch found it necessary in conjunction with his new allies to invade France in 1792, he retired upon the first appearance of a tolerably firm opposition, and gave the new republic a respite of another winter, during which to arrange its strength, and call into action its resources. In the year 1793, the Prussians remained extremely inactive till towards the close of the campaign, when, at last, in consequence of repeated remonstrances from their allies, they advanced against Alsace. Being there repulsed, and the republic beginning to exhibit on all sides a respectable military front, the king of Prussia declared, that the expenses of the war were more than his finances could sustain, and required the other German states to supply him with money, threatening in case of a refusal entirely to desert the common cause. Upon their declining to comply with his demands, he actually began to withdraw his troops. By this time, however, the British ministry had engaged in the war with a degree of eagerness, which induced them to make every sacrifice to obtain success in their object. On this occasion, therefore, to avoid losing the assistance of Prussia towards the common cause, they offered a subsidy, which was finally adjusted upon the following terms: His Prussian... Prussian majesty agreed to furnish 62,000 troops, which was 30,000 beyond his contingent; for which his Britannic majesty agreed to pay him 50,000l. a month, 100,000l. a month for forage, 400,000l. to put the army in motion, and 100,000l. on their return; in all for the remaining nine months of the present year, 1,350,000l. The whole year would amount to 1,800,000l. out of which the states general were to pay 400,000l. The forces thus subsidized, were to be commanded by an officer to be named by the king of Prussia.

By this treaty the king of Prussia was enabled to keep his army upon the war establishment with little additional expense to himself, and would have it in his power to claim a share of whatever conquests were made from France; while at the same time, by stipulating that he himself should appoint the general of the subsidized army, he retained a complete command over it, and could prevent his troops from being worn out by active service, and restrain them from doing greater injury to the French republic than he himself might judge prudent.

All Europe looked forward with great anxiety to the approaching campaign, as decisive of the mighty contest in which its whole powers, excepting Russia, Sweden, and Denmark, were actively engaged. At sea, where her strength could be most effectually exerted, Great Britain was eminently successful. An expedition, under Sir Charles Grey and Sir John Jervis, was sent to the West Indies, where Martinique, St Lucia, and other islands were taken. In the Mediterranean, the French were driven from the island of Corsica, and the inhabitants acknowledged the king of Great Britain as their sovereign. But the most signal victory, was that which was gained by Lord Howe, over the French fleet, on the 1st of June, near Brest. During the first years of the revolution, France had suffered much distress from a scarcity of grain; and such was the inveracity with which the present war was conducted, that the British government had formed a plan of subduing that nation by famine, by preventing their obtaining supplies of provisions from any foreign country. In their distress, the French rulers applied for assistance to the United States of America. The states still owed a considerable debt to France, which they had contracted to the monarchy in the war with Great Britain, by which their own revolution had been accomplished. The French now offered to accept payment of this debt, not in money but in corn, a commodity abounding in America. The Americans, accordingly, delivered the grain in their own ports, and 160 sail of vessels laden with grain set sail for France. Lord Howe was sent out to intercept, if possible, this valuable convoy; while, on the other side, the French admiral, Villaret Joyeuse, sailed from Brest to hazard an engagement with the British fleet, for the sake of preserving the convoy. The force of the hostile fleets was nearly equal, the British having 26, and the French 25 sail of the line; but the French line was broken, and at the end of an obstinate engagement, six of their ships were found to be taken, and two sunk. Their admiral, however, had before the battle, detached a considerable force for the protection of the convoy, which was thus enabled with safety to reach its destined port. This victory produced very great exultation in the British nation, in consequence of the fear of invasion, which had been previously excited, the danger of which, this proof of naval superiority seemed to place at a distance.

On the part of the French, however, these colonial and naval losses were greatly overbalanced by the campaign's general result of the campaign. The allies still concentrated their principal force against the Netherlands, and with that view, besieged and took Landrecies at the commencement of the campaign; but the fortune of the war was speedily turned. General Pichegru advanced into maritime Flanders, and in a variety of engagements, defeated General Clairfait, an Austrian officer of great activity, who speedily ruined his own army, by daily and languid efforts to drive back a superior enemy. An attempt made by the grand army to cut off the retreat of Pichegru was unsuccessful. He, in return, afterwards made an attempt, on his part, to cut off the communication between the imperialists and their stores at Ghent. He was repulsed; but the obstinate conflict which he maintained, and the steady fire of his troops, during a succession of battles, which lasted from daybreak till the setting of the sun, convinced the allied armies, that the invasion of France had become a hopeless project. At last, the French advanced, under General Jourdan, from the eastward, and at Fleurus gained a victory in which 15,000 of the Austrian troops perished. Mutual disgust, as well as discouragement, now prevailed among the allies. The Austrians retreated, leaving the duke of York, at the head of the British and Hanoverian forces, in considerable peril. He made good his retreat, however, with the assistance of Earl Moira. This nobleman (formerly Lord Rawdon) had distinguished himself in the American war. In the house of lords, he had opposed the present war, but he had been sent by administration with a feeble armament, where the greatest efforts of Britain ought to have been directed, that is, to assist the royalists on the western coast of France. Finding himself too weak to effect any important measure in that quarter, he had brought back his troops. He was afterwards sent with them to defend Ostend. Learning the difficult nature of the duke of York's situation, and perceiving that Ostend could not long be protected, and could indeed be of no value after the rest of Flanders was deserted, he marched across the country, and in the face of much danger, and great hardships, effected a junction with the principal British army, to which this reinforcement afforded feasible aid.

The French were no less successful upon the upper Rhine, on the frontiers of Italy, and of Spain. At the end of the campaign, an intense frost having set in, they reinforced their armies, and Pichegru invaded Holland. After a variety of engagements, the British and Hanoverians, together with some Austrian auxiliaries, whom Britain had subsidized, were repulsed, and found it necessary to leave Holland to its fate. Many Dutch families sought refuge in Britain. When Utrecht had submitted to the enemy, the stadtholder knowing that Amsterdam would not be defended, left his country, and escaped to England in a fishing-boat. He and his family became immediate objects jects of royal liberality, and were treated with the respect due to their rank and misfortunes.

The Dutch, who had viewed the English with a very unfriendly eye, since the revolution of the year 1787, appeared to be highly pleased with this change in their affairs. They had for some time treated our military countrymen with contempt and illiberality, and were not disposed to alleviate by kindness, or compassion, the sufferings of the wounded, or the distresses of the fugitives, who at length effected their retreat to Bremen, after a long and severe exercise of their patience and fortitude.

The united provinces were now revolutionized on the French model. Liberty, equality, and the rights of man, were proclaimed; representatives of the people were chosen, and the regenerated state was named the Batavian Republic. But the pretended friends of the Hollanders, in refusing them from what they termed a disgraceful yoke, did not suffer them to enjoy real freedom or independence.

The result of these successes was, that the king of Prussia, now perceiving France restored to more than her ancient energy, and become capable of endeavouring to humble his enemy, and her ancient rival, the house of Austria, deserted the coalition against her, refused to accept of any farther subsidy from Great Britain, and took under his protection, as neutral states, the whole princes of the north-west of Germany; thereby becoming the offensive head and guardian of a large division of the empire, which was thus enabled to recover its tranquillity, and to become a quiet spectator of the prolonged contest, which the rest of the empire under Austria continued to carry on against France. Spain was under the necessity of imitating the example of Prussia, though upon less favourable terms, being constrained to relinquish, as the price of peace, her half of the island of St Domingo. The duke of Tuscany also deserted a contest, into which he had been constrained to enter.

In the mean while, administration at home pursued their system of alarming the friends of internal tranquillity, by the dread of conspiracies, and attempts against the constitution. The persons who, in the month of May, had been imprisoned on a charge of high treason, were brought to trial in the end of October. The first that was tried, was Thomas Hardie. His indictment stated nine overt acts of high treason. 1st, That with others, he had formed an intention of exciting rebellion and insurrection; to carry which into effect, he and they had conspired to subvert the government, and depose the king. 2dly, That he and they had written diverse books, pamphlets, letters, and addresses, recommending delegates to a convention. 3dly, That they consulted on the means of forming such a convention. 4thly, That they agreed to form themselves into a society for the purposes aforesaid. 5thly, That they caused arms to be made to subvert the government, and depose the king. 6thly, That they conspired to levy war within the realm. 7thly, That they conspired to aid the king's enemies. 8thly, That they composed and published certain books, pamphlets, letters, exhortations, and addresses, for the purposes aforesaid. Lastly, That they procured arms, for the purpose of levying war against the king, and to excite rebellion, &c. The written evidence consisted chiefly of advertisements, and addresses, published in the newspapers, many of which were expressed in a very intemperate style, with regard to ministers; and the proceedings of the societies, which were all public, were of a similar nature. With regard to any intended armament of the people by these societies, it appeared to rest upon no solid foundation. The accusation and defence, therefore, rested chiefly upon the question of the intention of the party accused, and his associates. He was ably defended by Mr Thomas Erskine, and Mr Gibbs, and the prosecution was conducted by the attorney and solicitor-general. When the proceedings had continued to the eighth day, the jury after some deliberation, brought in a verdict of not guilty. The next trial was that of Mr Tooke, who endeavoured to prove, that he had merely followed the example of Mr Pitt, in recommending a plan of parliamentary reform. The minister was examined on the occasion, chiefly with regard to the proceedings of the popular party (before the close of the American war) for the attainment of that object; but he evaded most of the questions by alleging a want of recollection. The acquittal of Mr Tooke, being followed by that of Mr Thelwall, a despair of convicting any one of the supposed traitors produced a detestation of the indictment.

As the war was becoming unpopular, the acquittal of these persons, which tended to discredit the alarms kept up by the friends of administration, was felt by them as an additional misfortune. Had the indictments been laid only for sedition, the prosecutions would probably have proved successful; but ministers were led to carry matters the length of an accusation of treason, by their success in a similar charge at Edinburgh, in the preceding month of September, against two persons named Robert Watt and David Downie. Watt had been a spy, employed by government to attend political societies, and discover the designs of the leaders. As he was a needy person, and had been unable to communicate intelligence of much importance, he had received little pay. To earn more money, he had thought fit to contrive a plot, which he communicated to Downie, and some others, for seizing the castle and public offices at Edinburgh, with a view no doubt of afterwards holding out his associates to government as criminals. Neither he nor they had any means of carrying such a plan into effect. Watt, however, had procured some pikes, which he deposited in a cellar in his own house. These being accidentally discovered, he was apprehended; and the persons to whom he had communicated his plan, having come forward as witnesses against him and Downie, they were both found guilty of high treason; but Downie, who had done little more than appear to approve of Watt's plan, was recommended to mercy, and afterwards pardoned; but Watt was executed.

Another cause of encouragement to administration proceeded with measures of severity, arose at the same time from a plot brought to light by some informers, which by way of ridicule was afterwards termed the pop-gun plot. The persons implicated in this charge, were John Peter Le Maitre, a native of Jersey, and apprentice to a watch-maker in Denmark-street, St Giles's; William Higgins, apprentice to a chemist in Fleet-market; and a man of the name of Smith, who kept a book stall in the neighbourhood of Lincoln's-inn. Their accuser was one Upton an apprentice or journeyman to a watch-maker. Le Maitre, Higgins, and Smith, were apprehended on Saturday the 27th of September, by a warrant from the duke of Portland, as secretary of state, and were examined on Sunday the 28th before the privy-council, the lords of which were summoned again to attend on Tuesday on the same important business. The charge supported by the testimony of Upton, was to the following effect: An instrument was to have been constructed by the informer Upton in the form of a walking stick, in which was to have been inserted a brass tube of two feet long; through this tube a poisoned dart or arrow was to have been blown by the breath of the conspirator Le Maitre at his majesty, either on the terrace at Windsor, or in the playhouse. The poison was to have been of so subtle a nature, that if the point but glanced upon the king, it was to have produced instantaneous death. Nothing short of the most consummate ignorance of the state of human science could on any ordinary occasion have procured attention to such a ridiculous story as this. Such, however, is the well-known credulity of the English nation, with regard to political dangers, that administration and their friends appear to have regarded this plot as an affair of some importance, as tending to keep men's minds in a state of anxiety.

Parliament assembled on the 30th of December. In the speech from the throne, his majesty urged the necessity of persisting in the war, however unfortunate it had been, and noticed the rapid decay of the resources of the enemy. The Dutch had, he observed, from a sense of present difficulties, entered into a negotiation for peace with the prevailing party in France; but no established government could derive security from such a negotiation. The most effectual means had therefore been employed for the farther augmentation of the forces; on whose valour, as well as on the public spirit of the people, his majesty professed he had the utmost reliance. The speech ended with mentioning the accession of the sovereignty of Corsica to the British dominions; a treaty of amity and commerce with America; the conclusion of a treaty of marriage between the prince of Wales and the princess Caroline of Brunswick, in making suitable provisions for whom his majesty doubted not of the concurrence and support of both houses.

When an address to his majesty in the same terms with the speech was moved in common form, very animated debates took place in both houses of parliament. The war was attacked and defended upon the usual topics, with this additional circumstance, that the events of the late campaign gave considerable countenance to the assertions of opposition, that all hope of ultimate success was irrational. Administration, however, were no less powerful than formerly. On the last day of the preceding session, they had received into official situations some of those supporters of the war, who in former years had opposed their measures. Earl Fitzwilliam had been appointed president of the council. The duke of Portland became one of the secretaries of state. Earl Spencer was declared keeper of the privy seal, and Mr Windham secretary at war. Notwithstanding these official changes, Mr Pitt with the aid of his personal friend Mr Dundas, and his relation Lord Grenville, was understood to retain the efficient power of the state. Mr Dundas had still retained the management of the war with France; and as a kind of third secretary of state, he performed a considerable part of the business which would otherwise have devolved upon the duke of Portland, while at the same time he continued as president of the board of control to superintend the affairs of India, and to hold the office of treasurer of the navy. Earl Fitzwilliam was soon got quit of, without any disadvantage to administration. He was sent to Ireland as lord-lieutenant, under an agreement, as he alleged, that he was to have full power to promote the recall of the penal statutes against the Catholics, and to concede certain privileges which had been withheld in 1793. Afterwards, however, ministers in England having altered their sentiments about some of these points, prohibited him to proceed, and as he insisted upon the terms on which he accepted his situation, he was recalled and dismissed from office. By joining ministers for a time, he was prevented from acting along with opposition, in reprobating the war, and thus he was left insulated and separated from both parties.

Among the debates of the present session, one of the most remarkable was that which occurred upon the motion of Mr Grey in the house of commons on the 26th of January 1795, "That the existence of the present government of France ought not to be considered as precluding at this time a negotiation for peace." He said, that after two years of war, which had drained this country of its blood and treasures, we did not appear to be one point nearer to the object for which it was undertaken. From certain words of the minister on a former occasion, Mr Grey inferred, that this was a war usque ad internecionem, or a mortal strife to be carried on till one of the parties should be destroyed. He wished, by the present motion, to put the question to issue, whether this opinion was countenanced by the house of commons. He said that the public at large, and even the enemy with whom we were contending, had a right to know the length to which the contest was to be carried, and the terms upon which peace was to be obtained. He endeavoured to show that there existed no prospect or chance of success in overturning by force of arms the republican government of France, and that a war persisted in with that view must necessarily be absurd. He contended, that the people of France were too firmly attached to their new arrangements to be likely to give them up, however they might change their leaders. A dependence upon a decay of their finances was, he alleged, equally ill founded. Both in the American war, and the present, the affairs of the British nation were unfortunately entrusted to persons unable to distinguish between the fallacy of imperfect calculations, and the energy of a people struggling for independence. He said that the French government were admitted to possess a landed estate far exceeding in value the most exaggerated account of their debts. With this, was to be considered the addition of the money of Holland, the population of France, which was equal to that of one-sixth of the whole of Europe, and the distracted and impoverished state of our allies. Our own resources were, he doubted not, equal to every thing to which they ought to be applied, but not equal to the conquest of France, or to a war of aggression. For the exhausted state of the emperor's finances, he appealed to a memorial he had recently addressed to the circles of the Upper Rhine. Was it then from him, from the Italian states, the kings of Sardinia, Naples, and Spain, or from our disgraceful alliance with the empress of Russia, that we expected afflatus? Or was it from our good German ally, who had taken 1,200,000l. of our money, who had not brought into the field the 62,000 men for which he stipulated, who had denied our right to command any of the Prussian troops, and contended that they ought not to march against the French, but to remain to defend Germany. The strongest reason which a great nation could have for war, was the defence of its honour; this, he contended, we had so fully vindicated, as to secure us from future insult. The decree of the convention, November 19, 1792, was now no bar to a negotiation, as that declaration had been repealed, and followed by a contrary declaration. It had been stated, that there had been periods at which a negotiation could commence. It was a proper period at the time the misunderstanding commenced with this country; and at several times when we had been successful since, negotiation might have been begun. This, Mr Grey remarked, had been repeatedly advised from his side of the house; and thus much misery might have been prevented. While we possessed great power and great resources was the time for negotiation. Should the French proceed in their rapid career of conquest, it would not be easy. Were even the house willing to trust ministers with the prosecution of the war, would the minister declare he could trust the allies? This, therefore, was a time for negotiation; and should our attempts of that nature prove fruitless, the house and the people would cheerfully concur in a vigorous prosecution of the war; and we should then resemble France in the only point in which she was to be envied, the unanimity of the people with their government. As additional reasons, Mr Grey noticed the capture of Holland, and the debates in the diet at Ratibon, in which all parties agreed for overtures to the enemy, except the elector of Hanover, and the landgrave of Hesse.

Mr Pitt, in reply, asserted, that the motion was utterly inconsistent with the sentiments formerly expressed by his majesty and by parliament. He therefore proposed an amendment, importing, that "it was the determination of the house to prosecute the war, as the only means of procuring a permanent and secure peace; relying on the intention of his majesty, vigourously to employ the force of this country in support of its interest, and on his desire uniformly manifested of effecting a pacification with France, under any government capable of maintaining the relations of peace and amity." Mr Pitt contended, that no nation at war with another, ought to treat for peace, with a government that could not give security. This last he asserted to be the great object by which alone the war could be terminated. "What did we naturally look to in the state of any country, but to the manner in which they performed their engagements; to their stability, their apparent authority, and the reliance that might be placed on their pacific dispositions? Nothing but a series of revolutions had been generated under the tyranny and principles now prevalent in France." He represented the agriculture and commerce of France as in the most disastrous situation, and justice as almost unknown. With respect to their religion, he demanded, whether the house would willingly treat with a nation of atheists. He would not, however, say, that they might not improve. When they should come into such a state, as would give, with regard to their government, that stability and authority, which afforded a probability that we might treat with security, then we might negotiate; but we ought, in prudence, to wait the return of such circumstances as would afford a chance of treating with success. He considered the French as having begun the war, upon the principle, that their own was the only lawful existing government, and that they had a right to destroy all others as usurpations; a principle from which they had not yet ceased to act. In April 1793, the French had enacted the penalty of death, upon any person who should propose peace with any country, which did not acknowledge the French republic one and indivisible, founded on the principles of equality. The admission of these principles amounted to a confession of the usurpation and injustice of every other government. In treating for peace with France, one preparatory step was, the acknowledgment of what the house had hitherto denied. They must acknowledge those principles which condemned the usurpation of all other governments, and denied the very power they were exercising. Were peace to be obtained, he thought the country in the utmost danger from French emissaries; and if a peace should be so insecure as to require us to remain in a state of vigilant jealousy and never-ceasing suspicion, we would be under the necessity of retaining an establishment, which would prove burdensome to peace, and ineffectual to war. With respect to the comparative resources of this country and France, the latter had, as he stated, expended 260,000,000l. sterling, during the last two years. Affigants, he said, were at 15 per cent.; and everything proclaimed a rapid decay of the French resources. Ministers, he declared, had never looked to the conquest of France. Peace was not obstructed by any form of government, but by the internal circumstances of France. An attempt to treat, instead of accelerating peace, would only be productive of danger; it would encourage the enemy, and sink the spirits of the people of this country.

Mr Fox accused ministers of tergiversation. He said, he approved of the amendment, so far as it stated, that there existed nothing in the present form of government of France to prevent negotiation; but he complained, that, during two successive years, opposition had moved a similar amendment; and for doing so, they had been called the advocates of France, Jacobins, republicans, enemies of their king and country, &c. though it was now pretended that all this time they were speaking the sentiments of ministers. He contended, that the minister had, in fact, found it necessary to alter his conduct; and that the impolitic speech he had put into the mouth of his majesty, at the opening of the session, had made a serious impression upon the public, which must be done away. What, he asked, would have been the feelings of Englishmen, Britain. Englishmen, if the convention had determined never to treat with them till there was a reform in the English government? We must do away all our arrogant expressions against France, and then, even though we should not obtain peace, yet we should take from them the cause of their enthusiasm, that which roused every national feeling, and had carried them to unparalleled exertions. They would not then feel that they were to fight to extremity, for daring to give to their own country the government they liked. He wished us not to diminish our force; but surely we could fight just as well, if necessary, after declaring we had no intention to reduce a people to slavery. He ridiculed the idea of danger from the influx of French principles, and observed, that the constitution of this country had been endangered to us, from the fatal experiments made in France. He called the recollection of Mr Pitt to the declaration of his father, "that they should die in the last breach before they granted the independence of America;" yet the first act of his political life had been to sign the very independence which his father had deprecated. Necessity dictated that act; and he must now, on the same account, retract his declaration respecting France.

The motion was opposed by Mr Dundas, on the ground that it would fetter the executive government in their negotiations for peace; and he thought we had the utmost reason to expect success from the prosecution of the war: at least, it was a fair presumption, that our situation would not be worse if we continued the war. Mr Grey's motion was negatived by a majority of 183, and Mr Pitt's amendment afterwards adopted, by a majority of 164.

On the following day, the duke of Bedford brought forward, in the house of lords, a motion, similar to that which Mr Grey had supported in the house of commons. This patriotic nobleman, who enjoyed great popularity, because he expended his princely revenue in promoting and giving countenance to the agriculture of his country, urged the necessity of an explicit declaration of the real object of the war. Ministers said, negociation was dishonourable, as the French were the aggressors. Admitting this, what scenes of blood must Europe have exhibited, had it been adopted as a general principle, that no party should manifest a wish for peace, which had not been the aggressor in the war. That the French, however, were not the aggressors, his grace contended, from the retraction of the offensive declaration; from the explanation offered by the minister; from different speeches in the convention, and the decree afterwards passed that they would not interfere with the government of other countries. As to a permanent peace, no such thing could be found in the absolute sense of the word. An equitable peace was the only one likely to prove permanent. He contended, that we ought no longer to trust to the efforts of our continental allies. He did not believe the finances of France exhausted; but admitting they were nearly so, could we hope to ruin them? certainly not. While there was property in the country, the government would find means to obtain it; and, while the people were convinced it was a war of extermination or unconditional submission, they would sacrifice their property. Still less was the probability of outnumbering them. Attempts had been made to excite the passions of men, by calling this a war in the cause of humanity and of God. Whatever it might have been during the life of the king, whose death he thought accelerated by our interference, it could no longer be called so. It had, as allowed by ministers, produced the system of terror in France; and could the death of 50,000 British subjects, and of hundreds of thousands of innocent soldiers on all sides, be called a circumstance favourable to humanity? It was admitted, he said, that the present government of France was infinitely milder than what it had been; but, instead of afflicting her rulers in the work of reformation, our ministers declared, they should not restore order and justice but by our means, and that we would not be satisfied without carrying war to their frontiers, and famine to their interior. By this course, we should never conquer the armies or the opinions of France, but might regenerate the system of terror. The adoption of his motion would, his grace observed, unite the people of this country, if the war continued, and disunite the people of France.

Lord Grenville moved an amendment, precisely similar to that which had been introduced by Mr Pitt in the house of commons the preceding evening. He thought the present was not a moment convenient or proper for forwarding a negociation. It never, he said, had been his opinion, that this country should not make peace with another, merely on account of their form of government; but, in such a negociation, especial care should be taken to provide for that most important of all concerns, security. His lordship declared his belief, that a majority of the French were favourers of royalty; and the re-establishment of monarchy presented the most probable hopes of peace. Ministers had, he said, never declared that they would not treat with any government capable of maintaining the accustomed relations of peace and amity. He denied, however, that any probability existed of the permanency of the present French government. He entered into a detail of the shocking impieties of the French; and insisted upon the failure of their resources, and the disaffection of a considerable number of the people towards the present ruling party, who had peremptorily refused to the lawful heirs the restoration of that wealth, of which their fathers had been unjustly deprived. He allowed, that, by the new system in France, we were in a situation less remote from that in which we might treat with a rational prospect of security. Till that period, however, arrived, which he thought far distant, he conceived, that a vigorous prosecution of the war was far preferable to any attempt to negotiate.

The bishop of Llandaff urged the importance of an immediate negociation to promote union at home, and to shew to the French, that, if refused by them, the war was continued in consequence of the ambition and oppression of their rulers. He was aware, that some might object to negociation, on the ground of evincing an unworthy want of firmness; but, in that respect, firmness was out of the question. When circumstances rendered it prudent to alter a course, to persist was not firmness, but obstinacy. It was a mistaken notion of firmness that lost America. It might be asked, if those who had been guilty of such atrocities ought to go unpunished? To this he would answer, that though the atrocities of the French disgraced human nature, we were not the avengers; they ought to be left to the wisdom and justice of God; or, if anything more was to be said, let their lordships pray to God for pardon to the guilty. He asserted, that even could we place upon the throne of his ancestors, the son of the last French monarch, he could grant us no indemnity for our past expenditure; his own subjects, and even our own continental allies, would not suffer him to do so. With respect to the charge of atheism against the French, as a reason for continuing the war, his lordship added: "Preliminary idea! Miserable beings as we are, do we imagine that the arm of flesh is wanting to assist and enforce the will of the Almighty? Not one of the tribe of modern philosophers can affect or injure Christianity. The abuse of religion has been mistaken for religion itself. Hence, France in the eagerness of her enthusiasm for reform of religious abuses, overlooked religion itself, and fell into atheism. But the mist of infidelity will soon be dispersed, and Christianity appear in a purer state."

The duke of Norfolk, the marquis of Lansdowne, the earl of Lauderdale, the duke of Leeds, and the earl of Guildford, farther supported the motion; while the amendment was defended by the earl of Darney, Lord Hawkesbury, Earl Spencer, Lord Hawke, the marquis of Abercorn, the lord-chancellor, Lord Auckland, and others. On a division, a great majority voted in favour of the amendment. The victories of the French, during the late campaign, and the despair of ultimate success in the war, which now began to be entertained throughout the country, encouraged opposition, to renew the subject, under a variety of forms, and to urge ministers to enter into a negotiation; but, on every occasion, the motions made by them were negatived by a similar superiority of numbers.

The number of seamen and marines voted during the present session, amounted to 100,000; while 119,380 men were voted to form the guards and garrisons. To procure the requisite number of seamen, the parliament required the merchants to give up a part of the crews of their shipping, in proportion to the tonnage; and ordered every parish to furnish one man for the service. A loan of £8,000,000 was found necessary, together with a large issue of exchequer bills, as the supplies voted amounted to no less than £29,307,000. The new taxes were made payable on wine, spirits, tea, coffee, stamps on deeds, &c., insurance on ships and cargoes, timber, and on persons wearing hair-powder.

Mr Wilberforce again brought forward the question of the slave-trade. He was supported by Mr Fox and Mr Pitt; but the proposed abolition of it was rejected in the house of commons, by a majority of 17.

During the present session, the long trial of Mr Hastings was at length brought to a conclusion. The subject was discussed in a committee of the house of lords. The lord chancellor, and the earl of Carnarvon, considered Mr Hastings as criminal; but he was defended very elaborately and ably by Lord Thurlow, who was supported by the marquis of Lansdowne, the bishop of Rochester, and others. When every part of the accusation had been disallowed by the committee, the report was reviewed by the house; and after some debates on the mode of proceeding, it was resolved, that the question should be separately put on 16 points. The greatest number of peers, who voted the defendant guilty in any one respect, did not exceed six. The votes of innocence on some of the charges, were 26; in others 23; in one 19. The lord chancellor then intimated the decision of the court to Mr Hastings, who received it in silence, bowed, and retired from the bar. The war in which we were now engaged, had rendered men more eagerly desirous of the aggrandizement of their country than they were when this trial commenced, and also less scrupulous about the means by which that aggrandizement was promoted. The services of Mr Hastings were now therefore more highly appreciated; and the public regarded, with satisfaction, the acquittal of one, who had so eminently promoted the interest of his employers, secured their authority, and extended and established their dominion.

At this time, the debts of the prince of Wales amounted to £30,000. It had been adjusted at court, the prince that these debts should be paid, and that the prince should marry his cousin, the daughter of the duke of Brunswick. After some discussion in the house of commons, the prince's establishment was fixed at £125,000, out of which he was required to pay £5,000 every year, till his debts should be liquidated. The rents of the duchy of Cornwall, amounting to £13,000, were also set apart for the extinction of the debts. Further sums were also voted to defray the expenses of the marriage, and the repairs and decorations of Carlton house. Parliament was prorogued on the 27th of June, by a speech from the throne, in which ministers thought it prudent to hold out to the public, some prospect of negotiation. "It is impossible (said his majesty) to contemplate the internal situation of the enemy, with whom we are contending, without indulging a hope, that the present circumstances of France, may, in their effects, hasten the return of such a state of order and regular government, as may be capable of maintaining the accustomed relations of amity and peace with other powers. The issue, however, of these extraordinary transactions, is out of the reach of human foresight."

The incidents of the war, during the year 1795, were less memorable than those of the former years. Lord Bridport, with an inferior force, attacked a French fleet, near Port l'Orient, and took three of their ships. Vice-admiral Hotham pursued to the Genoese coast, a fleet which had sailed from Toulon, to attempt the recovery of Corsica, and which had captured one of his detached ships. He brought the enemy to a partial engagement, and took two sail of the line; but he afterwards lost one of his own ships, in consequence of damage received in the conflict. On their own western coast, the French, with 13 sail of the line and 14 frigates, avoided coming to an engagement with Vice-admiral Cornwallis, who had only eight ships, including frigates. These events occurred early in the summer. Notwithstanding the vigilance of the British navy, the French captured, in the month of July, 30 sail of a valuable convoy returning from the Mediterranean. They also made prize of part of a Jamaica fleet. On the other hand, their own commerce had sunk so low, as to present few objects for our cruisers and privateers.

As the Dutch, though nominally the allies of the French, had, in fact, become subject to them; letters of marque were issued against them by Great Britain, and directions given to seize their colonial territories, under the professed intention, however, of releasing them when the stadtholder's government should be re-established. The Cape of Good Hope was taken, together with Trincomalee and the other Asiatic settlements of the Dutch, excepting Batavia. Their territories in the West Indies were not attacked during the present year, on account of the difficulties which the British experienced in that quarter, in keeping in subjection the islands captured from the French, where various insurrections were incited by their ancient masters. The island of Jamaica was also kept in a state of great alarm, by a small tribe of independent negroes, called Maroons, which had long existed in the mountainous parts of the island. These people, in consequence of a quarrel with the white inhabitants, committed many cruel ravages, and were not subdued till Spanish hunters and blood-hounds were procured from the island of Cuba, and employed against them, which induced them at last to submit to deportation from the island.

When it was too late, the British ministry resolved to give assistance to the royalists in the western parts of France. An expedition, planned, it was said, by Mr Windham, and guided by French emigrant officers, with troops, many of whom consisted of prisoners of war, relieved from confinement on condition of bearing arms against their country, set sail for the French coast, and landed upon the extremity of the narrow peninsula of Quiberon. Here they fortified themselves; but many of the troops, as might have been expected, proving unfaithful, they were speedily overpowered by the republicans, who, according to their custom, put to death such of their countrymen as they found in arms fighting against them. By this feeble and ill-timed invasion of the French territory, nearly 10,000 men were lost, that is, were killed or taken prisoners.

The continental campaign on the side of Germany was of little importance during this year, and was upon the whole unfavourable to the French. The convention had shaken off the government of that sanguinary faction, which, under Robespierre and his associates, had deluged the interior of France with blood, but which had possessed the merit of calling forth with astonishing energy, the powers of that country for the support of its independence. The present leaders possessed less activity, and affected a milder train of conduct. The military operations languished. The French army remained inactive till autumn, when it crossed the Rhine near Mentz, under General Pichegru, but was speedily repulsed, and an armistice was concluded for the winter. The convention, however, established a new form of government, consisting of an executive directory of five persons, elected by two representative bodies, to which the powers of legislation were intrusted; and it was naturally expected, that if the war should continue, the new executive power would endeavour to distinguish itself by some important operations.

The British parliament was again assembled at a very early period, the 29th of October. The state of public affairs bore at this period an unfavourable aspect. The French armies had been inactive during the summer, but they had lost nothing; the new republic retained possession of the territory extending from the Pyrenees to North Holland, and consequently of an immense length of coast opposite to Great Britain. In the meanwhile, a dearth of provisions began to prevail at home. The winter, which had set in with extreme severity at the close of the year 1794, and enabled the French to conquer Holland with little difficulty, was followed by an ungenial summer, during which the crop failed in consequence of almost incessant rains. This state of affairs was productive of discontent in many among the lower orders of the people, and the war was blamed as tending to aggravate the distresses which they suffered. Previous to the meeting of parliament, some meetings were held by the London Corresponding Society, for the avowed purpose of petitioning the king in parliament in favour of peace and a parliamentary reform. As the meetings were held in the open fields, they were very numerously attended, but the persons composing them dispersed without disturbance. At the opening of parliament, some riots took place; and though it did not appear, that the persons guilty of these riots belonged to the society above mentioned, yet it seems probable, that its meetings had tended, along with the general state of public affairs, to rouse the attention of the multitude to political subjects.

His majesty proceeded from the palace to open the session of parliament at the usual hour, between two and three o'clock; and the crowd in St James's park, which is always considerable on these occasions, was certainly greater than usual, though it was thought to have been overrated, when estimated at 150,000 persons. A fine day, and a rumour which had been circulated, with what view it is impossible to ascertain, that a riot was likely to take place, contributed greatly to increase the multitude of the spectators. As the royal carriage passed along the park, the predominant exclamations were "Peace! peace! Give us bread! No Pitt! No famine! No war!" A few voices were heard to exclaim, "Down with George," or words to that effect. In the park, and in the streets adjacent to Westminster hall, stones and other articles were thrown, nine of which, it is asserted, struck the state-coach; and one of them, which was suspected to have proceeded from a window in Margaret-street, near the abbey, perforated one of the windows by a small circular aperture: and from these circumstances, it was supposed by some to have been a bullet discharged from an air-gun, or from some similar engine of destruction: but no bullet was found; and whatever it was, it neither touched the king nor the noblemen who attended him. As his majesty returned from the house through the park, though the gates of the Horseguards were shut to exclude the mob, yet even this precaution was not sufficient to prevent a renewal of the outrages, and another stone was thrown at the carriage as it passed opposite to Spring-garden terrace. After After the king had alighted at St James's, the populace attacked the state-carriage, and in its way through Pallmall to the Mews, it was almost demolished.

The speech from the throne stated his majesty's satisfaction, that the general situation of affairs, notwithstanding many events unfavourable to the common cause, was materially improved. The French had, in Italy, been driven back, and were checked on the side of Germany. Their successes, and the treaties of peace they had entered into, were far from compensating the evils they had suffered from the continuance of war; and the unparalleled embarrassment and distress of their internal situation appeared to have produced an impression that their only relief must result from peace, and a settled government. The crisis in which they now were must probably produce consequences important to the interests of Europe. If this crisis terminated in anything affording a reasonable expectation of security in any treaty, the appearance of a disposition to treat for peace, on just and suitable terms, would, his majesty added, be met on his part with an earnest desire to give it the speediest effect. The acceleration of this desirable end required, however, that we should prove our ability to prosecute the war till we could conclude it in a peace suited to the justice of our cause, and the situation of the enemy.

In the speeches for and against the usual addresses little novelty occurred; the same subject, that is, the propriety of the war, having been so repeatedly discussed. Administration took advantage of the attack upon his majesty's person, to issue a proclamation connecting the meetings of the Corresponding Society with the insults offered to his majesty, and to bring forward two penal statutes. The first was introduced into the house of lords by Lord Grenville, under the title of "an act for the safety and preservation of his majesty's person and government against treasonable and seditious practices and attempts." One clause ordained the capital punishment of every one who should express, utter, or declare by the publication of writings, or by any overact, such imaginations, devices, or intentions, as were calculated to injure the king, impair his authority or that of the parliament, or promote an invasion of his dominions. Another provision was, that all declarations tending to excite hatred or contempt of the king should be considered as high misdemeanours; and it was decreed, that a second offence of this kind might be punished, either in the ordinary mode, or by banishment from the realm, for a term not exceeding seven years. The other bill was introduced by Mr Pitt in the house of commons. It enacted, that no meeting of any description of persons, exceeding the number of 50, except such as might be called by sheriffs, or other officers or magistrates, should be held for political purposes, unless public notice should have been given by seven housekeepers; that if such a body should assemble without notice, and 12, or more, individuals should continue together (even quietly) for one hour after a legal order for their departure, they should be punished as felons, without benefit of clergy; and that the same rigour might be exercised, if any person, after due notice of the meeting, should use seditious language, or propose the irregular alteration of anything by law established. With regard to the delivery of lectures or discourses, or the exercise of debate, on topics connected with the laws and government of the country, a license was declared to be necessary for such meetings.

Very animated discussions upon these bills took place Petitions for in both houses of parliament. While the discussions and against were going on, many petitions were presented against the bills. On the other hand, various corporations and public bodies petitioned for their enactment. The result of the whole was useful to ministers; as the disputes which thus arose, tended to revive in the minds of persons of property that political alarm which was now passing away, and to remove a portion of that dislike to the war, which naturally arose from the want of success with which it had been attended. The two bills were enacted into laws by the votes of great majorities. Still, however, administration were sensible that it would become necessary, for the sake of preserving their popularity, to assume an appearance of willingness to put an end to the war. Accordingly while the two bills were still under discussion, each house received a message from the king, in which, alluding to the new constitution, and the directorial rage from government of France, he said, that such an order of the king's things had arisen as would induce him to meet any desire of negotiating on the part of the enemy with a full readiness to give it the speediest effect. When an address of thanks for this communication was moved, Mr Sheridan suggested an amendment, tending to produce an immediate negociation, and to remove, by a renunciation of the principles on which the war had been conducted, all obstacles to the attainment of peace. Mr Fox also wished, that the first offer should proceed from our court; but Mr Pitt and Mr Dundas thought it advisable to wait till the enemy should manifest a disposition to negotiate. Similar observations were made in the house of peers. At a future period, Mr Grey moved, that his majesty should be requested to intimate to the executive government of France, his readiness to enter into a negociation for the re-establishment of peace on reasonable terms. He said, he was sorry to observe, that the court appeared to be more intent on warlike preparation than eager to promote peace: overtures from this country, he thought, could not be degrading; and he flattered himself with the hope, that they would be successful. Mr Pitt wished that this affair might be left to the discretion of ministry. It was proper, he said, that the allies of Great Britain should be consulted, as a close concert with them would give greater dignity and effect to a negociation. Steps had been already taken to ascertain the disposition of the enemy; and if there should be a prospect of an honourable peace, the opportunity would be embraced with pleasure. Mr Fox said, that a better season for treating than the present might not occur for a long period; and he hoped, that, as the French had renounced the decree of fraternity, every idea of interference in their interior concerns would, on our part, be disclaimed. This would be a good preparative to negociation; and a subsequent offer of moderate terms would expedite the accomplishment of the desirable object. Only 50 members supported the motion, while 189 voted against it.

On the 8th of March 1796, Mr Wickham, his majesty's minister to the Swiss cantons, transmitted a note to negotiate. Britain. M. Barthelemy, the French ambassador at Berne, stating, that he himself was not authorized to enter into any negociation, but requesting information in writing on the part of his court about three points. First, Whether France was disposed to send ministers to a congress to negociate a general peace with his Britannic majesty and his allies. 2dly, Whether the French government would be willing to state the general grounds upon which they would consent to conclude a treaty; and, 3dly, Whether the French government would think fit to propose any other mode of arriving at a general pacification. M. Barthelemy returned an answer, on the 26th of the same month, stating, that the executive directory doubted the sincerity of these overtures of peace, from the proposal of a general congress, which would lead to endless negociations, and from Mr Wickham having received no powers to negociate. He asserted, however, the willingness of France to make peace; but declared, that the executive directory had no power to relinquish any of the territories which the constitutional act had declared to form an integral part of the republic. With regard to other territories occupied by the French armies, these, he said, might become objects of negociation.—As the Netherlands, and the island of St Domingo, had been declared by the new French constitution, to form a part of the territory of the republic, the British government immediately published a note declaring these pretensions on the part of France totally inadmissible; and that while they were persisted in, nothing was left but to prosecute a war equally just and necessary. This first attempt towards negociation for peace gave rise to various debates in the British parliament, in all of which administration were supported by their usual majorities.

Supplies were voted during this session to the amount of £758,000, and upwards of twenty-five millions and a half were borrowed. As no prospect existed that British armies could be employed on the continent, the guards and garrisons were reduced to 49,000 men. The forces in the colonies were increased to 77,000; the sailors and marines were 110,000. Taxes were imposed on legacies to collateral relations, and on horses, and dogs, and hats. The assented taxes were increased, and also the duties on wine, tobacco, salt, and sugar. Parliament was dissolved on the 26th of May, and new elections immediately took place.

An extremely active campaign was now opened by the French upon the continent. Their generals, Moreau and Jourdan, advanced into Germany. They were ultimately repulsed by the archduke Charles, but not till they had reached the vicinity of Ratibon. The retreat of Moreau, amidst hostile armies, formed one of the most celebrated events of the war. On the side of Italy the French obtained greater ultimate success. Their new general in that quarter, Bonaparte, compelled the king of Sardinia to desert the allies, and to purchase peace at the expense of a considerable portion of his territory. He next descended into the Milanese; obliged the Italian states to surrender their finest paintings, statues, and other curiosities, together with large sums of money, as the price of peace; and after a multitude of sanguinary conflicts, he succeeded in subduing, by famine, Mantua, the only fortress that remained to the Austrians in Italy.

Few maritime events of much importance occurred. The Dutch lost their whole tropical possessions, with the exception of the unhealthy but rich settlement of Batavia in the island of Java; and they also lost a squadron which they sent out to attempt the re-capture of the Cape of Good Hope, but which was itself made prize of by the British admiral, Sir George Elphinston. On the other hand, the British were under the necessity of abandoning Corfuca, in consequence of the conquests of Bonaparte in Italy, and the mutinous spirit of his countrymen, the Corsicans.

The result of the campaign was, that the British ministry, to avoid quarrelling with the nation, found it necessary to send Lord Mahenbury to Paris to negotiate a peace. It was afterwards admitted by Mr Pitt, that, at this period, they had no wish to conclude a treaty, and that the measure now mentioned was adopted merely in compliance with the obvious wishes of the public. Accordingly, as the French still refused to relinquish the Netherlands, this was adopted as a sufficient reason for persevering in the war.

The early part of the session of parliament, which met on the 6th of October, passed away with few debates, on account of the intention to attempt an immediate negociation, which had been announced in the king's speech, and afterwards on account of the expectation of its issue. At the close of the year, the French directory, in consequence of an invitation from a disaffected party in Ireland (see IRELAND), sent to invade that country, an expedition of 17 ships of the line and many smaller vessels, bearing an army of 18,000 men under General Hoche. The violence of the winds prevented the rendezvous of this armament at Bantry bay, in consequence of which no landing was attempted, and the fleet returned home with the loss of two ships of the line and two frigates, which perished in a tempest, and one frigate taken by the English. Shortly thereafter the French disembarked on the coast of Pembrokeshire criminals, whom they had sent as soldiers upon the Irish expedition, but whom they did not now know how to employ.

At this period the first instance of serious difficulty occurred in the management of the British funding system. The large sums of money sent abroad as subsidies to foreign princes by government, had diminished the quantity of gold and silver in Great Britain. At the same time, administration, through the medium of the bank of England's paper, had issued immense sums for the public expenses, and in payment of the additional interest of the national debt. The alarm occasioned by the Irish invasion coming in addition to these circumstances, produced a greater demand than usual upon the bank to exchange its paper for specie. Thus their coffers were soon drained, and to replenish them they were under the necessity of giving for bullion a premium, or high price, which they paid with their paper. This made matters worse, for certain persons secretly melted down the guineas which the bank had procured to be coined, and, for the sake of the premium, sold this gold back to the bank as bullion. A ruinous traffic was thus carried on by the bank, which purchased bullion at a high rate, while they gave out their guineas at the usual price. The directors of the bank were under the necessity of laying their case before the privy council, which issued an order against the issue of cash by the bank. Considerable alarm was occasioned by this step. Committees of the two houses of parliament were appointed to inquire into the state of the bank's affairs, both of which reported them to be prosperous, yet each recommended a continuation of the late prohibition. An act was therefore passed for confirming the restriction, and to render it less inconvenient, bank-notes for one and two pounds were put into circulation. At the same time private persons were not compelled to accept of the bank of England's notes in their transactions with each other. As the bank of England is the office through which the British government issues all payments, and as these payments are made in the bank's paper, which administration might influence the directors to augment indefinitely, many persons feared and predicted, that this paper would speedily sink in value when compared with gold and silver, as the French assignats and the American paper currency had done, when rendered not convertible at pleasure, into specie. The stability, however, of the British funding system speedily displayed itself. The credit of the bank of England's paper remained unshaken, because government received it in payment of all taxes, and these taxes fully equalled the interest of the whole sums borrowed by the public.

During the preceding year the emperor had received a subsidy, under the appellation of a loan, from the British government, and a new subsidy was now given him under a similar appellation. To supply this and the rest of the national expenses, early in the session £7,647,000 were voted, and afterwards above £5 millions additional were thought necessary, and voted. Two loans were negotiated by government, one for £16 millions and a half in the usual way, from money-brokers, and another of £8 millions, called the loyalty loan, from the nobility and gentry being requested to fill it up, which they did with eagerness. The troops voted consisted of 120,000 seamen; 60,765 soldiers for guards and garrisons, that is, for European service, and above £64,000 for the dependencies of Great Britain. As the fear of invasion was now revived, a large supplementary body of militia was levied, together with a considerable force consisting of cavalry. The interest of the two loans was provided for by taxes upon houses, stage-coaches, horses, auctions, stamps on agreements and newspapers, ornamental plate, spirits, tea, coffee, &c. Towards the close of the session, opposition unsuccessfully brought forward motions to address the king to dismiss his ministers, refuse the negotiation with France, and to repeal the two acts introduced in the preceding session, by Lord Grenville and Mr Pitt, for extending the treason laws, and imposing restrictions upon popular meetings for political purposes. They were encouraged in some measure to these motions by a variety of addresses which at this time were presented from different parts of the country, to his majesty, advising him to dismiss the present ministry.

The French had now acquired such an ascendancy over the Spanish monarchy, as to induce the government of that country to declare war against Britain. Their fleet, amounting to 27 sail of the line, attempted to join a French armament; but were attacked by Sir John Jervis, on the 14th of February, near Cape St Vincent, with only 15 sail of the line; and four of their ships, from 74 to 112 guns, were made prizes by the British fleet. The island of Trinidad was also taken from them; and there also they lost four ships of the line and a frigate.

At the commencement of the summer an event occurred, which, had the French been prepared to attempt an invasion of this country, might have been productive of serious evils. This was a mutiny in the fleet. It appears that very great impositions had for some time been practised upon the seamen with regard to their provisions, both as to the quantity and quality allowed them. They made an anonymous application for redress to Earl Howe, by a letter. The application was disregarded, because the strictness of discipline prevented the open avowal or public appearance of discontent, which his lordship, therefore, inconsiderately supposed did not exist, and that the letter must be an imposition. The seamen resolved to enforce redress. When orders were given to prepare for putting to sea, the crew of the Queen Charlotte, and other ships lying at Spithead, refused to act; and treating with contempt the remonstrances of the officers, made choice of delegates, who, after a formal consultation, drew up petitions to the board of admiralty, and the house of commons. Earl Spencer, the naval minister, that is, the first lord of the admiralty, dreading a dangerous mutiny, and not thinking the demands unreasonable, promised compliance; and the king readily offered full pardon to all who should immediately return to their duty. The seamen, however, would not declare their satisfaction before the parliament had confirmed the promises of the lords of the admiralty; and, as some delay was thus produced, the irritation of their minds led to a contest with Vice-admiral Colpoys, in which some lives were lost. An act was passed for the gratification of the seamen both in point of pay and provisions; and subordination was restored at Spithead and Plymouth.

The grant of these claims encouraged the seamen at the Nore to insist on a more punctual discharge of arrears, a more equal distribution of prize-money, and a general abatement of the severity of discipline. A council of delegates was elected, at the head of whom was a seaman named Richard Parker, who took the command of the fleet. He prevailed upon the men to reject repeated offers of pardon. He robbed two merchant-ships of provisions, and obstructed trade by the detention of others; and he fired on some ships of war that refused to accede to the mutinous combination. An act of parliament was passed in the beginning of June, denouncing capital punishment against all who should hold intercourse with the rebellious ships, or voluntarily continue on board. As the public strongly disapproved of this last mutiny, for which no excuse could be offered, the seamen gradually returned to their duty. Parker was apprehended, and with several other mutineers was punished with death. A considerable number were condemned after trial, but the greater number were pardoned.

During the summer the port of Cadiz was blockaded by the British fleet under Earl St Vincent (formerly Sir John Jervis). An attempt was made against the Spanish Spanish island of Teneriffe, but without success. In the meanwhile another fleet, under Admiral Duncan, lay before the Texel. When he retired for a short time, the Dutch admiral De Winter sailed out. Intelligence of this event was immediately brought to Admiral Duncan at Yarmouth, who instantly put to sea; encountered the Dutch fleet near their own coast; and out of 21 vessels of different descriptions, captured seven sail of the line and two frigates. This event excited, as usual in such cases, the most lively joy in the British nation, from its tendency to put an end to all fears of invasion.

While their allies, or rather subjects, were suffering these disasters by sea, the French armies triumphed on the continent. Bonaparte advanced from Italy against the centre of the Austrian dominions. After several sanguinary conflicts, he crossed the Alps, where they approach the frontiers of Hungary, and forced the emperor to conclude a preliminary treaty on the 18th of April, at Leoben. This was followed by a definitive treaty, signed at Campo Formio, near Udine, in Italy, on the 17th of October. The emperor acquired the city of Venice; but he relinquished the Milanese and the Netherlands, and, by secret articles, contented that the Rhine should be the boundary of France.

Britain was now left alone in that contest into which she had originally entered as a sort of auxiliary to Austria and Prussia. The British government, therefore, again entered into a negotiation towards the close of the summer. Both the French and British nations now eagerly wished for a termination to this sanguinary contest, and it is probable, that administration at last seriously wished to conclude a treaty; but by this time a violent party, headed by the director Barras, had gained the ascendency in France, and resolved to continue the war. A demand was therefore insolently made, that Britain should renounce every conquest as a preliminary to farther negotiation, while France reserved a right to make demands. On a refusal of compliance, the British ambassador, Lord Malmesbury, was dismissed from Lille, where the negotiations had been held.

Parliament assembled on the 2d of November. In the speech from the throne, his majesty expressed his concern, that his endeavours to restore peace had been rendered ineffectual. But he expressed the fullest reliance in the magnanimity and courage of a free people contending for their best interests, in a war in which they were compelled, by necessity, to persevere. During this session of parliament, few or none of the members of opposition attended. At the close of the preceding session the members of opposition had declared this to be their intention, and they justified their conduct in the following terms: "In times when every man who censures the conduct of administration is regarded as in league with the enemy, for what end should we incur to block a censure? If we declare our sentiments, we are proclaimed as the enemies of our king; if we tacitly acquiesce in the measures of the minister, we voluntarily take upon us a share of the responsibility. We have done our utmost to prevent the war; we have urged repeatedly the necessity of bringing it to a speedy termination: we have not persuaded our opponents. Events must now take their natural course: we cannot aid with counsel; it shall not be said, that we embarrass by opposition." This retirement of opposition, however, was much resented, and spoken of with great bitterness, by the friends of administration, as it had a tendency to suggest to the nation, the idea that government was conducted by the power of the crown alone, unchecked by the discussion of its measures by men of talents in the two legislative assemblies.

The inability of the bank of England to pay upon demand its notes in specie, according to ancient custom, and to the terms of the obligation contained in these notes, appears now to have suggested to Mr Pitt some fear with regard to the funding system, and an apprehension, that from the immense sums annually borrowed, and the corresponding quantity of paper-money necessarily issued to pay the interest of the loans, the system might be carried too far, so as to discredit this paper-money issued in the name of the bank of England. This apprehension was strengthened by a fact, of which all persons were daily becoming sensible, that the money price of all kinds of property in Great Britain had rapidly risen during the war; and this rise of price was very justly ascribed to a gradual sinking in the value of money, (that is, of paper, the only money used in Britain) in consequence of its too great abundance. Mr Pitt therefore proposed, instead of borrowing the whole sum necessary to defray the expense of the war, and imposing no more taxes than were requisite to pay the interest of the loan, that heavier taxes should be imposed, to defray, by means of them, a portion of the extraordinary expenditure. Accordingly an act was passed with the view of raising seven millions within the year. This was to be done by augmenting, in a threefold proportion, and, in some cases, by raising to five times their former amount, the assessed taxes, that is, the taxes on houses, windows, male-servants, horses, and carriages; but so as not to compel any individual to pay more than one-tenth of his income. The leading members of opposition attended to oppose this extraordinary measure, but without effect.

As the French were now disencumbered from all other hostility, it was naturally expected that they would turn their arms in a more direct manner than formerly against the British empire. The result of the late combination of the states of Europe, for the partition of France, had been extremely disastrous, and had left the new republic in possession of an extent of territory which the ablest and most ambitious of the ancient French monarchs had in vain aspired to possess. The command which they had now obtained of Holland rendered France more dangerous than formerly, by the superior means of invasion which an additional extent of coast, and the possession of a large quantity of shipping, might afford; and had the French navy been less weak, or the French rulers possessed of greater ability, a dangerous crisis in the history of Great Britain might at this period have occurred.

It never was the interest of any British administration to conceal from the public at large, the possibility invasion of a foreign invasion. As the French government at this time boasted of their intention to make such an attempt, and ordered a considerable army to advance to the sea coast, it seemed in some measure the duty of ministers in Great Britain, to make preparations to resist any such effort. Accordingly they readily came forward in parliament, to propose measures of defence; and the danger into which the nation considered itself as brought, obliged all men, in some measure, still to adhere to an administration, which, in other respects, might have lost all their popularity from the ill success of their late measures.

On the 8th of February 1793, Mr Dundas moved in the house of commons for the introduction of a bill, to enable the king to incorporate in the regular militia a portion of the supplementary militia. The bill was passed with little debate. On the 27th of March, the same minister moved for leave to bring in a bill, to enable his majesty to take measures for the more effectual security and defence of these realms, and to indemnify persons who might suffer injury in their property by the operation of such measures. He stated, that the bill had several objects. Already some counties had expressed a wish to adopt measures in their nature similar; for instance, Dorsetshire. Propositions were made by the men of property, which induced the sheriff to hold several meetings; but, as from the nature of his office, he could only call out the posse comitatus, in cases limited by circumstances of mere local exigency, these meetings had no other effect, than that of giving a collected expression to the patriotism of that county. In other counties, the lord-lieutenants had done more; but it was doubtful whether they could go beyond certain bounds. It was, he said, the object of this bill to provide for every possible emergency, by giving a power to his majesty to discover who were the persons prepared to appear in arms to embody for their own defence. Another provision of the bill was to see what number of the inhabitants of certain districts would be able to act as pioneers, or in other laborious situations. Mr Dundas also remarked, that, in the crisis of real danger, some persons might be influenced by motives of personal safety, or the natural wish of preserving their property, which might lead individuals to withdraw from their country; the present bill, however, would provide, that should the property of individuals be destroyed by a marching army, or fall into the enemy's hands, or be taken for the service of the country, indemnification should be rendered according to its value. The other provisions were, that in the event of its being necessary to employ persons as pioneers to remove stock, or assist in facilitating the carriage of military stores, proper compensation would be made. The bill, he observed, was intended to give a power of embodying also a portion of the regular militia, and employing them in the defence of the country. Upon these broad principles of justice, he was confident, the spirit of the country could be exerted; and he believed that there was nothing that could better infuse confidence into a people, and make them feel that their security depended on the measures taken for their defence, than to enable them to unite to defend themselves.

The bill was enacted into a law after some unimportant debates. The principal members of opposition not usually attending, the persons who chiefly now appeared to oppose the measures of administration, were Mr Tierney, Mr Nichols, Sir William Pulteney, General Tarleton, and others, who had formerly been considered as occupying a less important place in the discussions of the legislature.

As it was supposed, that the war, on the part of Redemp- Britain, would occasion greater expense than when all Europe had been engaged in it along with her, the land-tax supplies were augmented to £5,000,000; and, with a view to draw supplies from distant parts of the country, instead of raising large loans for the public service, which were negotiated in London alone, Mr Pitt brought forward a scheme, by which proprietors of land were enabled to redeem the land-tax; in other words, that the owner of land, and failing him, that any other person, should be permitted to purchase this tax, by a transfer of stock, which produced a dividend greater than the amount of the impost. The measure was enacted into a law, but produced little immediate effect.

On the 25th of May, Mr Pitt brought forward a Navy-bill in the house of commons, intended to increase the navy, with a view to resist, with greater success, the threatened invasion. On this occasion, an event occurred, which seemed to indicate, that by the long possession of power, and the uncommon support he had received from the nation, Mr Pitt had suffered to grow upon him a certain haughtiness of manner and impatience of contradiction, which, in former times, would have proved extremely inconvenient to a British minister. On the subject of his proposed bill, he said, that the object he had in view, was to suspend, for a limited time, the protections which various descriptions of persons enjoyed, to prevent them from being impressed into the service of the navy. It was his wish, he said, that the bill should this day pass through its different stages, with a suitable pause at each, if required, and that it should be sent to the lords for their concurrence. Mr Pitt concluded, by moving for leave to bring in a bill for the more speedy and effectual manning of the navy.

Mr Tierney said, the very extraordinary manner in which the right honourable gentleman called upon the house to adopt this measure, could not fail to create great alarm. He had imagined, that the augmentation of the navy was to be provided for in the usual way; or, if any very uncommon mode was to be reported to for the attainment of that object, notice should have been given to the house. For his part, he had heard no arguments that proved its propriety; and even if he had, some time ought to have been allowed him to weigh the force of such arguments, before he proceeded to give three or four votes on a measure, of which no notice of any kind had been given. If the honourable gentleman persisted in hurrying the bill through the house in the manner proposed, he must give it his decided negative. Indeed, from what he had already seen, he must view all the measures of the ministers as hostile to the liberties of the subjects of this country.

The chancellor of the exchequer replied, that if every measure adopted against the designs of France was to be considered as hostile to the liberty of this country, then indeed his idea of liberty differed widely from that of the honourable gentleman. He observed, that he had given notice before of the present motion; and that, were it not passed in a day, those whom it concerned might elude its effects. But Britain, if the measure was necessary, and that a notice of it would enable its effects to be eluded, how could the honourable gentleman's opposition be accounted for, but from a desire to obstruct the defence of the country?

Mr Tierney called the right honourable gentleman to order.

The speaker observed, that whatever had a tendency to throw suspicion on the sentiments of a member, if conveyed in language that clearly marked that intention, was certainly irregular. This the house would judge of; but they would wait to hear the right honourable gentleman's explanation.

The chancellor of the exchequer replied, that if the house waited for his explanation, he feared it must wait a long time. He knew very well, that it was unpatriotic to state the motives that actuated the opinions of gentlemen; but it was impossible to go into arguments in favour of a question, without sometimes hinting at the motives that induced an opposition to it. He submitted to the judgment of the house the propriety of what he argued; and he would not depart from anything he had advanced, by either retracting or explaining them.

The result of this altercation was a duel on the following Sunday, between Mr Pitt and Mr Tierney. They went to Putney Heath, attended by seconds; and, standing at the distance of 12 paces, each of them fired twice; but Mr Pitt fired his second pistol in the air. The seconds interfered; and thus the affair terminated.

During the summer of this year, a rebellion broke out in Ireland, the particulars of which will be stated in their proper place (see IRELAND). We shall only remark here, that Ireland has, at all times, been in a very unhappy state. Two-thirds of the population are Roman Catholics, professing, till lately, no political rights; excluded by penal statutes from all employments in the army, and from every incorporation; while, at the same time, they are under the necessity of paying tithes to the Protestant Episcopal clergy. The Protestants, who form the remainder of the people, have long been divided among themselves; one part being Presbyterians, while the remainder are attached to the Episcopal church. These divisions never fail to produce great unhappiness; and such was the miserable policy followed by England, that, instead of incorporating Ireland with itself with a view to form an united empire, with a single legislature, as King James I. had proposed, and as was attempted during the usurpation, the British government usually chose rather to hold Ireland in a state of constant dependence, by governing it through the organs of a faction, and by rather encouraging than attempting to do away the divisions that existed among its inhabitants. The enthusiasm which the French revolution had kindled in so many quarters of Europe, extended itself to Ireland. Some men there, of ardent imaginations, chiefly Protestant dissenters, persuaded themselves that they could regenerate their country, cast off the dominion of Great Britain, heal the unhappy divisions among the inhabitants of Ireland, and convert it into an independent republic. As early as the year 1793, these persons formed themselves into a society, under the name of the United Irishmen, and were gradually joined by a very great proportion of the population of the country. They at first sought aid from France; and it was in consequence of their invitation, that the unsuccessful expedition under General Hoche was undertaken. From that period, the country remained in a state of the greatest alarm. On one side rigorous laws were enacted, and every effort was made, by severity of punishment, to repress all appearance of opposition to the existing government; while, on the other hand, the common people buried themselves in the fabrication and concealment of pikes, or broke into the houses of country gentlemen, to seize whatever firearms they could discover. The schemes of the disaffected party were greatly disconcerted, by the discovery and apprehension of their principal leaders. A rebellion, however, actually broke out; and, though attended with considerable destruction of human lives and of property, it was of a partial nature, and speedily repressed. During its existence, some circumstances occurred, which completely demonstrated of how visionary a nature the schemes of these persons had been, who hoped to establish, in Ireland, an independent government, upon any basis that could afford a tolerable hope of national prosperity. The disaffected party among the Protestants were too weak to be able of themselves either to shake off the dominion of Great Britain, or to assume the ascendancy in Ireland. They were therefore under the necessity of calling in the aid of the Roman Catholics, of whom the great mass of Irish population consists. They were the more readily induced to do so, in consequence of the notion, which of late years had very generally gained ground in Europe, that religious sentiments form no proper source of distinction in civil society; and from perceiving the facility with which the Catholics of France had set at defiance the religion of their fathers, when placed in competition with what they accounted the interests of freedom, or the means of aggrandisement to their country. But it speedily appeared, that these new maxims of conduct could not be adopted by the superstitious and illiterate peasantry of Ireland. The Catholics were no sooner in arms, than their chief animosity came to be directed, not against the dominion of Britain or against any form of civil government, but against their own countrymen of the Protestant faith, who must thus ultimately have fallen a sacrifice to the success of their own schemes. In short, it became evident to all persons of reflection, that Ireland could not possibly exist in tranquillity, or with safety to the Protestant part of its inhabitants, independent of the supremacy of Great Britain.

Upon the continent, the world was amused with a negotiation which was carried on at Rastadt, between persons at the French directory and the German empire. The Rastadt negotiation was conducted with much show, and ultimately became ineffectual. While it was going on, the French government contrived to quarrel with land seized the Swiss cantons, invaded and seized their country, by the and converted it into a new republic, under their own influence. Austria, however, had been so much humbled by recent losses, that she did not venture, on this occasion, to assert the independence of Switzerland, although it must have been evident to all discerning persons, that her own independence was ultimately connected with that object. Switzerland consists of a vast assemblage of lofty and precipitous mountains, situated in such a manner as to divide the most important countries of Europe from each other. On one side, these mountains look down upon the fertile country of Italy, to the north they command the very centre of Germany, and to the west they are bounded by France. For ages they have been inhabited by a virtuous and fearless race of people, divided into petty communities, who contented themselves with maintaining their own independence; and though, as individuals, they entered into the military service of the neighbouring princes, yet as a people, they had long ceased to take any part in the wars of Europe. For some centuries, the independence of Switzerland proved the chief basis of the independence of the neighbouring nations. All parties respected and avoided any dispute with the Swiss, in a war against whom much might be lost, but nothing could be won. Accordingly, when the French attacked the Austrians, and when the Austrians attacked the French, the afflicting party was under the necessity of sending its armies to a great distance from the centre of its own power. If defeated, the march homewards was long and difficult; while, even if tolerably successful, the attack was never seriously dangerous, in consequence of the weakness with which it was made in a remote quarter. Hence when, in 1796, the French generals, Moreau and Jourdan, marched through Swabia and Franconia to invade Austria, the length of their march afforded many opportunities of attacking them with success; and the invaded country had full leisure to call forth its whole resources against them. The result was, that, when Jourdan was defeated, the retreat of the other army became almost impracticable; and hence arose the unbounded reputation acquired by Moreau, in consequence of accomplishing it with success. Had the French, at that period, occupied Switzerland, the retreat of Moreau would have been attended with no difficulty; because, by retiring into that rugged country, he could easily have made a stand against a very superior force, for a considerable time, till he could receive reinforcements from home. For the future, therefore, by commencing a war of invasion against Austria, not upon the frontiers of France, but at the eastern extremity of the Swiss mountains, the French, if successful, might reach the gates of Vienna in a few weeks. The independence of Switzerland, by placing these nations at a distance from each other, had hitherto prevented such an enterprise from being carried into effect; and the present removal of that barrier by the French directory, during a period of peace with Austria, displayed, on their part, a correct knowledge of the cause which had, at all times, fet bounds to the ambition of France; and, at the same time, a determined spirit of hostility against the independence of the surrounding states.

In the meanwhile, the weakness of the French navy rendered it impossible for them to engage in any serious attack against the European part of the British empire. The French government, however, with the double view of attacking the rich empire which Britain had acquired in Asia, and of removing a popular military officer, whose ambition was already accounted dangerous, formed a scheme of sending Bonaparte, with an army, to seize and colonize Egypt. To accomplish the scheme with the greater safety, the threats of invading England were loudly renewed. The troops upon the coast were denominated the army of England, Egypt. Bonaparte was appointed their commander, and visited them in person: But he suddenly departed, and embarked at Toulon with a great army, before his intentions were suspected in Great Britain. Malta was surrendered to him on his passage. Departing thence, the Nile. He landed in safety in the vicinity of Alexandria, and soon was master of all Egypt. Here, however, his successes terminated. He was closely pursued by a British fleet, under Admiral Nelson; and the French admiral, instead of putting to sea, having injudiciously remained at anchor near the shore, gave an opportunity to some of the British ships of war to run between a part of his vessels and the coast, while others attacked the same vessels from the sea; and thus, by putting them in succession between two fires, captured or destroyed the whole, excepting two ships of the line, which put to sea and escaped.

From the time of the battle of Aegium, by which its effects, the sovereignty of the Roman empire was decided, no naval victory was ever attended with consequences so immediately and obviously important as this. The French directory had concealed their intended enterprise from the Ottoman Porte, which lays claim to the sovereignty of Egypt, but has never been able to make its claim fully effectual. The Grand Signior, however, considered the present attempt as an act of hostility against himself; and the maritime victory above mentioned, encouraged him to declare war, in the name of all Mussulmans, against that host of infidels which had invaded the land, from which the sacred territory of Mecca is supplied with bread. In Europe, similar consequences took place. The irresistible career of Bonaparte had compelled Austria to submit to peace, upon terms which left France in a state of most dangerous aggrandizement. But the terrible Bonaparte, with the best part of his victorious army, was now held under blockade by the British fleet in a distant country. The hopes of Austria began to revive, and there seemed reason to expect, that by renewing the contest, her ancient rank in Europe might be recovered. The king of Naples entered into these views with great eagerness, and rashly went to war with France, without having patience to wait, and to follow the movements of the greater powers.

The empress of Russia was now dead, and was succeeded by her son Paul. She had never contributed more than her good wishes towards the war, which against the other powers of Europe had waged against France. But her son, a man of a furious and passionate character, was unable to follow the same cautious policy, or to remain a quiet spectator of the issue of a contest against the French republic, in which he considered all princes as deeply interested. He was encouraged by the naval victory gained at the mouth of the Nile, which seemed to insure the absence of Bonaparte and his army, to declare his willingness, so far as his finances would permit, to join in a new combination against France.

Thus, by the victory at the Nile, Great Britain was enabled to procure allies, willing to send abundance of troops against her enemy, providing she would defray the necessary expense. In the mean time, the acquisitions and losses of Britain, were nearly equally balanced in other quarters. An armament sailed towards the island of Minorca, and a descent was made near the creek of Addaya. A body of Spaniards threatened to surround the first division of the invading army; but they were soon repelled, and our troops gained a position, from which they might have attacked the enemy with advantage, if the latter had not retired in the evening. The army seized the port Mefcalda, and a detachment took the town of Mahon and Fort Charles. The chief defence was expected at Ciavella, where new works were added to the old fortifications. The approach of the English drove the Spaniards within the walls of that town, and General Stuart summoned the governor to surrender it without delay. To enforce compliance, two batteries were erected; but, as the invaders had few of the requisites of a siege, their adversaries might, with a small share of spirit, have made a considerable resistance. Intimidated, however, by the movements of the troops, and the appearance of the squadron, the garrison capitulated; and thus the whole island was reduced without the loss of a single man.

Towards the end of the same year, however, the British troops, which during a considerable length of time had occupied a great number of positions upon the coast of the island of St Domingo, found it necessary to abandon the whole. The power of the French government had nearly been annihilated there, by a negro commander (Toufaint), to whom the British surrendered Port au Prince and St Marc. The losses incurred in consequence of the unfortunate attempt made by the British government to subjugate that island, were immense; 15 millions of money were expended, and, it is said, that upwards of 20,000 men were lost, chiefly by the ravages of the yellow fever, added to the natural malignity of that climate to European constitutions.

Parliament assembled on the 20th of November. It was said, in the speech from the throne, "that the success which had attended our arms, during the course of the present year, had been productive of the happiest consequences, and promoted the prosperity of the country. Our naval triumphs had received fresh splendour, from the memorable action in which Lord Nelson had attacked a superior enemy, and turned an extravagant enterprise to the confusion of its authors: the blow thus given to the power and influence of France had afforded an opening, which might lead to the general deliverance of Europe.

"The magnanimity of the emperor of Russia, and the vigour of the Ottoman Porte, had shown, that these powers were impressed with a just sense of the present crisis; and their example would be an encouragement to other states to adopt that spirited line of conduct, which was alone consistent with security and honour. Our preparations at home, and the zeal of all ranks of people, had deterred the enemy from attempting to invade our coasts. In Ireland, the rebellion had been suppressed: the views of ill-minded people, who had planned the subversion of our constitution, had been fully detected and exposed; those whom they had misled, must now be awakened to their duty; and the miseries which those traitorous designs had produced, impressed the necessity of repelling every attack on the established government of their country.

"Under the pressure of protracted war, it was a great satisfaction to observe, that the produce of the public revenue had been fully adequate to the increase of our parliament expenditure; the national credit had been improved, and commerce had flourished in a degree unknown."

The debates which occurred in the house of commons upon this occasion, were not remarkably interesting, as the leading members of the old opposition were usually absent. Administration was chiefly opposed by Mr Tierney, Sir Francis Burdett, Sir John Sinclair, and Sir William Pulteney. In the house of lords, Earl Darnley moved the usual address to the throne, and the address was seconded by Lord Craven. This last nobleman discussed, in terms of great triumph, the situation and prospects of Britain. He remarked, that, after being defeated by the allies, whose cause we had espoused, it was gratifying to see the noble stand we had made, and the success we had obtained by our single exertions. The navy of the French republic was annihilated; her boasted army of England lost its title; not only our coasts at home, but our most valuable possessions abroad, were secured. There was only one branch of commerce which we did not before almost exclusively possess, namely, that of the Levant; and of that trade France would now be totally deprived, and we should reap all those advantages which had hitherto maintained her navy. The situation of Bonaparte was also in our favour; cut off from all means of retreat, and beset on every side with obstacles. These successes had given spirit and alacrity to several of the foreign powers, who had unequivocally determined to join against the common enemy. Russia and the Ottoman Porte had declared themselves; and Austria, though unwilling, would find it her interest to unite in the exertions which our example had recommended to all Europe, and without which it would be in vain to look either for security or peace.

The marquis of Lansdowne remarked, that the greatest conquests were but fleeting objects unless well used, and, however fascinating by their splendour, would pass away without solid cause of joy, unless made the means of obtaining the most desirable good, so often recommended by himself in that house, a safe and honourable peace. The real patriot would think his service best repaid, by knowing it had tended to procure the cessation of arms, and the return of tranquillity. He had no doubt, but that Lord Nelson would highly prefer this satisfaction to any personal compliment which could be paid him; and the marquis acknowledged his regret in observing, that the victory of the Nile, which might have led to peace, was employed as a reason for new exertions, and a continuance of the war. And in what manner? By again combining with the European powers, by every one of whom we had already been abandoned. His lordship reproved the conduct of the French; but, afflicting, that the proposed means for diminishing their power, were inadequate to the object in Britain, in view. We now were told of the vigour manifested by Russia and the Porte, a monstrous alliance between the Turks and Russians. We all knew, that their mutual difficulties exceeded those of other nations; it was hereditary, it was implanted in their nature, and strengthened by their education. The family upon the throne of the Russians had uniformly cherished the notion that Constantinople was to be a part of their inheritance. It was with this view they named the second son of the present emperor Constantine II.; and it was from a coalition of this sort, that we were to derive hopes of vigorous operations against France. If Russia were in earnest, why did we not hear of the other northern powers coming forward in joining in the league. As to the Grand Signior, what was the Ottoman Porte? Turkey was the most helpless of all countries upon earth, incapable not only of external operations, but of domestic defence, and in a state of universal infirmity. Defeated in more than 30 attacks upon one rebellious pacha, unable to resist the rebellion of a subject, was it from such a country that we were to expect a vigorous co-operation; upon such a league that we could place our confidence? His lordship, therefore, urged the propriety of assuming the moment of victory, as the proper period, in which, without humiliation, we might safely testify a wish for peace.

Lord Holland supported the same sentiment. He said, that the speech from the throne held forth the probable success of a powerful confederacy against France. We had heard such language before; but we had only seen, in consequence of these confederacies, devastation extended over the surface of the globe, with less and less prospect of procuring tranquillity. The former confederacy of princes was the chief cause of the calamities produced by the French revolution. Experience might teach us, that it was impossible to derive any advantage to this country from them. We might recollect, that we never had an alliance with any of them, who had not deserted us. Austria, the most considerable, was only a drain upon us, and a temptation for the conquests of the enemy.

The late glorious victory ought to induce us to show a disposition for peace. It would not be humiliation, but magnanimity; nor would the people of this country fancy it was a degradation, if his majesty's ministers, in their name, would evince a pacific spirit. The people of England had no wishes inconsistent with the glory of their country; and he heartily regretted, that they had not their due weight in the government. Of the diminution of expense he saw but little probability; having observed, that in the years when we had the strongest assurances of retrenchment, our expenditure had increased the more.

On the contrary, Lord Mulgrave was surprised, that any Englishman should think that this was a moment for proposing peace, especially to such an enemy as we had to contend with. Reference to the fate of the former attempts, had little to do with the present. He demanded, whether the relative situation of the two countries were the same as at the beginning of the war either in point of glory, in point of finance, or in point of the popularity of the two governments. When the contest first began, the parties started as great rivals upon equal terms; at present, however, every thing which could constitute advantage was in our favour.

In such a position of things, would it be wise to trust Britain, the moderation which the noble lord had so highly extolled? ought we to rest our security upon the pacific disposition of the present rulers of France? Was it found policy, at a moment when a prospect had arisen of securing the independence of Europe, to throw away our advantages, and seek, by crouching at the feet of France, a precarious, hollow, and fallacious peace, without endeavouring to turn the glory we had earned into a universal benefit to the world?

In support of the same sentiments, Lord Grenville stated, that the powers of the continent were at present willing to embrace a train of conduct suited to the protection of their independency; and was this a moment for England to show, that she was guided by little selfish politics? Instead of leaving Europe to its fate, and abandoning the victims of French dominion to their misery, it ought to be the business of Great Britain to animate their efforts, and contribute to their deliverance. It was the duty of ministers to promulgate this glorious purpose, to conciliate differences, to allay jealousies, and not, by reviving them, to prevent that co-operation which was so necessary to the general safety, and connected with the true interests of the country.

As a prospect was now opened of reviving, upon a New measure most extensive scale, the continental war against France, it became necessary to provide great pecuniary resources to subsidize the armies which were to be brought forward, especially by the Russians, the poverty of whose country could ill afford to sustain the expense of supporting armies in Italy or the banks of the Rhine. The same difficulties, however, or rather doubts concerning the prudence of carrying to its utmost length the British practice of borrowing money to defray the extraordinary expense incurred during each year of war, which had led to an augmentation of what are called the affected taxes, still induced the minister to attempt to raise a proportion of the extraordinary or war expenditure within the year, not by a loan, but by taxes to the requisite amount. With this view, what was accounted Income a very bold measure was brought forward. This was tax, a proposal for imposing a general tax upon the income of every individual throughout the nation. Mr Pitt stated, in the house of commons, his plan to be, that no one whose income was less than 60l. per annum should be obliged to contribute more than the taxes he already paid; but that every one who had an income of, or beyond, that amount, should be additionally burdened, some in the proportion of ten per cent. others at a lower rate. All who had 200l. a-year, would be required to sign a declaration of their willingness to pay a certain sum, not less than a tenth part of their income, without particularizing the modes in which it accrued; and a scale of easy computation would be adjusted for the rest. If doubts of the fairness of a statement should arise, the commissioners might summon an individual before them, and demand upon oath a minute specification of income; and if, on a continuance of suspicion, full proof of accuracy should not be adduced, they might fix the amount of contribution. If they should require more than a tenth, no relief would be allowed, unless the books of the tradesmen, or the ordinary accounts kept by others, should be submitted to inspection. Having stated the outlines of his plan, Mr Pitt mentioned the data upon which he formed an estimate of its produce. He was of opinion, that the annual rent of all the land in England and Wales, amounted to twenty-five millions of pounds sterling; a sum which, by the allowance of a fifth part for the exceptions under 60l. and the modifications under 200l. a year, would be reduced to twenty millions. Six millions he thought might be allowed as the clear income of the land to tenants, the tithes might be valued at four millions, the produce of mines, canals, &c. at three, the rent of houses at five, and the profits of the liberal professions at two: on all these heads, it might be sufficient to allow an eighth part for Scotland, which would be five millions. Income drawn from possessions beyond seas might be stated at five; annuities from the public funds, at twelve; those of internal trade, mechanical skill, and industry, at twenty-eight millions. These calculations formed an aggregate of an hundred and two millions; and from this source about ten millions of supply were expected to arise.

The whole of this measure was opposed, without success, by Mr Tierney, Sir John Sinclair, Mr Pulteney, and others. Its chief defects were two: it was unequal in its principle, and, when carried into practice, occasioned much falsehood, with a view to evade it. Its inequality in point of principle is extremely obvious; because, under the tax upon income, a man without capital who earned 200l. per annum, by his industry, paid the same tax to government, with a man living in idleness, and enjoying a revenue of the same amount upon a land estate; though it is obvious that the wealth of two such persons, as well as the degrees in which they deserve public encouragement, are very different. In its collection this tax presented to merchants, and all other persons whose income depends upon their own industry, a powerful temptation to represent its amount as extremely low. It was expected, indeed, that the vanity of appearing wealthy and prosperous, would counteract this tendency; but it was soon found that, in a commercial community, the love of gain is not easily subdued by any other passion: and as a general understanding soon prevailed among men, with regard to each other's feelings upon this subject, nobody regarded his neighbour as unprosperous, merely because he had reported his own income, to government, at a low rate.

The fear of a French invasion, had in a former age induced the English nation so far to vanquish their own prejudices, as to consent to an incorporating union with Scotland. The late rebellion in Ireland, together with the dread, that by means of French aid, Ireland might be dismembered from the British empire, as the American colonies had been, now produced a sense of the necessity of doing what ought to have been done three centuries before this date, that is, of uniting Ireland to Britain, by incorporating into one the heretofore distinct legislatures of the two islands. The measure was at this period very practicable, because Ireland was, in fact, under the dominion of 40,000 troops, who had been collected to crush the rebellion, and protect the island against the French; and because the friends of government were too much intimidated by the confusion, and the scenes of bloodshed, which had recently occurred there, to venture to oppose vigorously, a measure which promised to preserve for the future the tranquillity of the country inviolate.

On the 31st of January, Mr Pitt proposed the measure in the British house of commons. He said, that a permanent connexion between Britain and Ireland, was essential to the true interests of both countries; and that unless the existing connexion should be improved, there was great risk of a separation, he had strong reasons to believe. The settlement of the year 1782, he said, was so imperfect, that it substituted nothing for that system which it demolished, and it was not considered as final even by the ministers of the time. It left the two realms with independent legislatures, connected only by the identity of the executive power, a very insufficient tie, either in time of peace or war, inadequate to the consolidation of strength, or the mutual participation of political and commercial benefits. The case of the regency exhibited a striking instance of the weakness of the connexion; and if the two parliaments had differed on the subject of the war, the danger of a disjunction would have been seriously alarming. The entire dislocation of the kingdom was one of the greatest aims of our enemies; and, as their eventual success on Ireland would expose Britain to extreme peril, the establishment of an incorporative union, by which their views might be effectually baffled, was a necessary act of policy. Great Britain had always felt a common interest in the safety of Ireland; but that interest was never so obvious and urgent, as when the enemy attacked the former realm through the medium of the latter. The French had shown by their conduct, that they deemed Ireland the most vulnerable part of the empire: and this consideration alone ought to enforce the adoption of a measure, which would tend to strengthen and secure that country. It ought to be noticed, that the hostile divisions of its sects, the animosities existing between the poverty of the original inhabitants and the descendants of the colonists, the rudeness and ignorance of the people, and the prevalence of Jacobinical principles among them, had produced a state of distress, for which there was no cure, but in the formation of a general imperial legislature, free alike from terror and resentment, removed from the danger and agitation, uninfluenced by the prejudices and unflamed by the passions, of that distracted country.

Among the advantages which would accrue to Ireland, from an incorporation with Britain, he mentioned the protection which she would secure to herself in the hour of danger; the most effectual means of increasing her commerce, and improving her agriculture; the command of English capital, the infusion of English manners, and English industry, necessarily tending to meliorate her condition; adding, that she would see the avenue to honours, to distinctions, and exalted situations in the general seat of empire, opened to all those whose abilities and talents enable them to indulge an honourable and laudable ambition. He farther remarked, that the question was not what Ireland would gain, but what she would preserve; not merely how she might best improve her situation, but how she might avert a pressing and immediate danger; in this point of view, her gain would be the preservation of all the blessings arising from the British constitution.

After some commercial statements, tending to show the benefits derivable to Ireland from an union, he asserted the competency of the legislature, not by argument or demonstration, but by allegations of the danger of controverting such right. A denial of parliamentary competence, he said, would amount to a denial of the validity of the Scottish union, and of the authority under which the existing parliament now deliberated; and it would even shake every principle of legislation. That a competency for any new, or very important measure, could only arise from the express directions or consent of the electors, or the great body of the nation, was a jacobinical idea, connected with the dangerous doctrine of the sovereignty of the people.

As the supposed loss of national independence formed, in the minds of many, a strong objection to the scheme, he argued, that the dreaded loss would be a real benefit; that the Irish would rather gain than lose in point of political freedom and civil happiness; and that though a nation possessing all the means of dignity and prosperity, might justly object to an association with a more numerous people, Ireland being deficient in the means of protection and civil welfare, could not be injured or degraded by such an union, with a neighbouring and kindred state, as would connect both realms by an equality of law, and an identity of interest. Her people would not lose members of an independent state, as to any valuable or useful purpose, or lose free in the enjoyment of the benefits of society and civilization.

Mr Sheridan opposed an union, as particularly unfeasible, amidst the irritation which prevailed at this period in Ireland; and deprecated the accomplishment of the object by means of force or corruption. The measure, however, was approved of by a majority of 145. In the house of lords, the same subject was afterwards discussed with a similar result. In the Irish parliament, however, the proposal was resisted with such vehemence, that administration, finding themselves supported only by a small majority, thought fit to avoid pressing the matter at the present period.

Before the rising of parliament, money was voted to the amount of £30,947,000l. to provide for the expenses of the war.

During the present year, the British power in India was greatly augmented, and its territory extended, by the fall of Tippoo Sultan, the son and successor of Hyder Ally. From the time that this prince had been compelled, in 1792, to surrender one half of his dominions, in consequence of the invasion by Lord Cornwallis, it was understood, that sooner or later, he would make an attempt to recover what he had lost. It would seem that he had entertained hopes of aid from the French, and that with this view he had privately sent envoys to the island of France, to attempt to form a connection with the present French rulers. When intelligence reached India of the expedition to Egypt, and the victory at the Nile, the British governor-general demanded from Tippoo Sultan, an explanation of his views, and after some fruitless negotiation, on the 11th of February a British army, under General Harris, invaded the territory of the Mylore, which they found in a bad state of preparation for war. After some slight engagements, the British army, on the 6th of April, encamped before Seringapatam. It was not till the 2d of May, however, that the besieging batteries began to make a breach. On the 4th, during the heat of the day, the place was stormed, and Tippoo himself perished fighting at one of the gates of the fort. His dominions were seized by the British, who bestowed a portion of them upon the Mahrattas, and the nizam their ally. A part was reserved under the direct sovereignty of the East India Company; and the remainder was nominally bestowed upon a prince of that family which had lost its power by Hyder's usurpation. The substantial authority, however, over this last-mentioned portion of Tipoo's dominions, was in truth retained by the British government. As the nizam himself soon became entirely dependent upon the British power, the whole peninsula of Indostan, might now be considered, by the death of Tippoo, as brought under our government, with the single exception of the territory of the Mahrattas, which evidently could not long remain unsubdued.

In Europe the present campaign was extremely eventful. The French directory had been more anxious to establish its own power at home, than careful to preserve the army upon the frontiers, and in the conquered countries, in a proper state of force and discipline. A French army, under General Jourdan, advanced into Swabia, in the month of March; but was encountered and beaten by a superior force, under the archduke Charles. The importance of the possession of Switzerland instantly displayed itself. The vanquished French army crossed the Rhine into Switzerland, and in that mountainous country, contrived to make a stand during the greater part of the summer. The Austrians advanced the length of Zurich, of which they obtained possession; but before they could proceed farther, the French armies were reinforced towards the end of the season, and were enabled in their turn to act offensively.

In Italy the French acted unskillfully at the opening of the campaign. Instead of concentrating their forces, they attempted to retain possession of the whole of that country, and were thus in various engagements beaten in all quarters. The combined armies of Austrians and Russians were commanded by the Russian general Suwarrow, who pressed upon the French with incredible activity, carrying on a multiplicity of sieges at the same instant, bringing his troops together with wonderful celerity, when his enemy attempted to take advantage of the manner in which his forces were scattered. The result of the whole was, that before the campaign terminated, he had driven the French out of the whole of Italy, with the exception of Savoy and the Genoese territory. But this was not accomplished without a great loss of men in sieges and sanguinary conflicts. In these last the hardy warriors of the north suffered very severely. Their leaders depended more for success upon the intrepidity of their troops, and the promptitude with which they rushed into action, than upon the skilful dispositions with which they arranged their force, or harassed their enemy. Hence, Hence, it happened that amidst all Suwarrow's victories, no instance occurred of any column of French troops being compelled to surrender without fighting, nor was any advantage gained but by the efforts of superior force exerted in open battle. Such a warfare, carried on against a single enemy by combined armies, could not be long successful. The Austrian officers complained loudly of their northern allies as men defective of military skill, who wasted armies without a proportioned return of conquest; while, on the other hand, the Russians censured their associates as defective of proper spirit, and as protracting the war by an ill-timed caution.

The advantage derived by the French from the possession of Switzerland, had by this time begun to be understood. A resolution was therefore adopted of closing the campaign, not by sending Suwarrow from Italy into the south of France, but by directing him to turn his arms northward against the Alps. The archduke Charles had spent the summer in pressing upon the French in that quarter, but had been unable to advance beyond Zurich; he now departed with a division of his army towards Mannheim and Philipburgh, leaving considerable bodies of Austrians and Russians at Zurich. To assume the command of these troops Suwarrow advanced from Italy at the head of 18,000 men. His views however were anticipated by the French general Massena, who finding the archduke Charles and Suwarrow at the distance of more than a day's march on his left and right, instantly attacked the troops stationed near Zurich. The Austrians perceived the hazardous nature of their own situation, and retreated out of Switzerland with only a moderate degree of loss. But the Russians, from an ill-judged contempt of their enemy, from their own ignorance of the country, and want of skill in the art of conducting war in it, maintained their ground till they were hemmed in on all sides. They attempted to resist the French, as they had often resisted the Turks, by forming a hollow square of great strength; but neither this nor their own courage afforded any safety against the flying artillery of their enemy, in the face of which an iron front of bayonets was in vain presented. Their order was at last broken, and their retreat was extremely disastrous; Suwarrow was in the same instant advancing rapidly to their relief; but a victorious enemy turned quickly upon him, and attempted to compass him on all sides. By great activity he effected his escape with about 5000 of his troops, in want of everything, and retaining only the musquets in their hands.

Thus terminated on the eastern side of France this very active campaign. The allies remained masters of Italy; but France was still enabled to menace that country, as well as Germany, by retaining possession of Switzerland. In the meanwhile, the British attempted with the aid of Russian auxiliaries to drive the French out of Holland. On the 27th of August, a landing was effected under Sir Ralph Abercromby at the mouth of the Texel. The Zuider Sea was immediately entered by a British fleet, under Admiral Mitchell. The Dutch admiral, Story, surrendered the fleet under his command, alleging that his men refused to fight. The ships were 12 in number, and eight of them mounted from 54 to 74 guns. Here, however, the effectual success of the expedition terminated. The duke of York afterwards assumed the command, and forces amounting to 35,000 men were sent over. But it was soon discovered that the invasion had been ill concerted. To have afforded a prospect of success, the invading army ought to have landed in the vicinity of Rotterdam, which is full of Scotchmen, and where the supporters of the stadholder were numerous; and to have advanced rapidly into the centre of the country, to encourage the numerous enemies of the French to stand forward in their favour. Instead of this, the army was set ashore at the extremity of a long and narrow neck of land, having the sea on both sides, where the French and Dutch found it no difficult matter to obstruct their progress with a handful of troops during a great length of time. Their difficulties were increased by the unusual wetness of the season, which greatly injured the roads. The British commander was at length under the necessity of withdrawing his troops to the point at which they originally landed; and a convention was entered into, by which it was stipulated on the one hand, that he should not injure the country, and that a number of French prisoners in England should be released; while on the other hand, it was agreed that the duke of York should be permitted to retreat unmolested.

At the end of this campaign, the French government underwent a new change at home. Bonaparte, after the conquest of Egypt, had invaded Syria; but found his career foiled at Acre by the Turkish governor of that town, assisted by the British under Sir Sidney Smith. Having returned into Egypt, and destroyed a Turkish army, Bonaparte ventured upon a step which is without example in the history of modern Europe. He had heard of the great reverses which the French armies had suffered in the early part of the campaign, and of the general discontent which prevailed throughout the nation in consequence of these misfortunes, and he resolved to try his fortune amidst the present troubled state of public affairs. With this view, along with a party of select friends, he secretly stole away from his army in a small vessel, leaving his troops blockaded by a British fleet in a barbarous country. The unexpected arrival in France of an officer who had never fought in Europe without success, was welcomed by the public at large as a most happy event; and in the first moment of joy, little inquiry was made about the manner in which he had forsaken his army, which in any other circumstances would have been regarded by a military people as one of the greatest of crimes. Finding a party willing to second his views, Bonaparte took advantage of the satisfaction occasioned by his arrival, together with the discontent arising from the corruption and mismanagement of the directorial administration, to usurp the government, and to dissolve the representative legislature.

The British parliament was assembled so early as Parliament the 24th of September, for the sake of providing for assemblies, the expenses and augmentation of force, thought necessary to give effect to the invasion of Holland, of the success of which sanguine hopes were at that time entertained. The speech from the throne began with recommending the propriety of permitting to a very considerable considerable extent, the acceptance of the voluntary service of the militia to augment our force abroad. It stated that our prospects under providence had been improved beyond the most sanguine expectation; the deliverance of Italy might now be considered as secured by a campaign, equal in splendour and success to the most brilliant recorded in history.

The kingdom of Naples had been rescued from the French yoke, and restored to the dominion of its lawful sovereign.

The French expedition to Egypt had been productive of calamity and disgrace, whilst its ultimate views against our eastern possessions had been utterly confounded; the desperate attempts which our enemies had made to extricate themselves, had been defeated by the courage of the Turkish forces, directed by the skill, and animated by the heroism, of a British officer; and the overthrow of that restless and perfidious power had placed the British interests in a state of permanent security.

There was every reason to expect that our present efforts for the deliverance of the United Provinces would prove successful. We had refused already the principal port and naval arsenal of the Dutch republic from the enemy; and might hope that the skill of our generals, and the intrepidity of our troops, would soon with the assistance of our allies surmount every obstacle, and that the fleet defined under the usurped dominion of France to invade these islands, would, under its ancient standard, restore the religion, liberty, and independence of provinces so long in alliance with this country.

To our good and faithful ally the emperor of Russia, whose wisdom and magnanimity directed the force of his extensive empire to so many quarters of Europe, we were in a great measure indebted for the favourable change in the general posture of affairs. In pursuance of the recommendation of the British parliament, his majesty had communicated their sentiments to both houses of parliament in Ireland, respecting an union with that kingdom, which would add so much to the security and happiness of his Irish subjects, and consolidate the strength and prosperity of the empire.

In consequence of the recommendation from the throne, an act was passed, authorising his majesty to receive into the army volunteers from the militia regiments; and some measures of finance were adopted; but government having received intelligence of the failure of the expedition against Holland, parliament was suddenly adjourned for some time. In the mean while, affairs on the continent began to assume an unpropitious aspect. The emperor of Russia, from his extreme vehemence of character, was led to entertain a very violent degree of discontent, on account of the defeats sustained by his troops in all quarters towards the close of the campaign. He became dissatisfied with his allies, and there was reason to dread that his irascible and unreasonable temper might lead him not merely to desert but to quarrel with them. In the mean while, Bonaparte, under the title he had assumed of Chief or First Consul of the French republic, resolved to signalize his acquisition of power, by what was now become a very popular measure in France, an attempt to procure peace. He thought fit, with this view, to address a letter, signed by himself, to the king of Great Britain. In this

letter he announced his own appointment to the office of first magistrate of the republic. He asked, "Is the war which for eight years has ravaged the four quarters of the world to be eternal? Are there no means of coming to an understanding? How can the most enlightened nations of Europe, powerful and strong beyond what their safety and independence require, sacrifice to ideas of vain grandeur, commerce, prosperity, and peace? How is it that they do not feel that peace is of the first importance, as well as the highest glory?

"These sentiments cannot be foreign to the heart of your majesty, who reigns over a free nation, with the sole view of rendering it happy. Your majesty will see in this overture my sincere wish to contribute efficaciously for the second time to a general pacification, by a step speedy, entirely of confidence, and disengaged from those forms which, perhaps necessary to disguise the dependence of weak states, prove in those that are strong only the desire of deceiving each other.

"France and England, by the abuse of their strength, may still for a long time, for the misfortune of all nations, retard the period of their being exhausted; but, I will venture to say, the fate of all civilized nations is attached to the termination of a war which involves the whole world." This letter was transmitted through the medium of an agent of the French government, who resided at London for the sake of managing the exchanges and other affairs relative to prisoners of war. Lord Grenville, as secretary of state for the foreign department, informed the agent who had transmitted Bonaparte's letter, that his majesty could not depart from the usual forms of transacting business, and therefore, that the only answer to be returned, would be an official note from himself. In this note, his lordship stated, that the king wished for nothing more than to restore vile's tranquillity to Europe; that he had only made war in order to defend his people, against an unprovoked attack; but that it would be in vain to negotiate while the same system continued to prevail in France which had ravaged Holland, Switzerland, Germany, and Italy.

"While such a system therefore prevails, (continued his lordship,) and while the blood and treasures of a powerful nation can be lavished in its support, experience has shown, that no defence but that of open and steady hostility can be availing. The most solemn treaties have only prepared the way to fresh aggression; and it is by determined resistance alone, that whatever remains in Europe of stability, for property, for personal safety, for social order, or the exercise of religion, can be preserved. For the security, therefore, of these essential objects, his majesty cannot place reliance on the mere renewal of general professions of pacific dispositions. Such professions have been repeatedly held out by all who have successively directed the resources of France to the destruction of Europe, and whom the present rulers have declared all to have been incapable of maintaining the relations of amity. Greatly will his majesty rejoice whenever it shall appear, that the danger to which his own dominions and those of his allies have been so long exposed, has really ceased; whenever he shall be satisfied that the necessity of resistance shall be at an end, and after so many years of crimes and miseries, better principles have prevailed, and the gigantic projects of ambition, endangering the very existence of civil society, have at length been relinquished. But the conviction of such a change can result only from the evidence of facts.

"The best pledge of its reality and permanence would be the restoration of that line of princes which, for so many centuries, maintained the French nation in prosperity at home and consideration abroad. Such an event would at once remove all obstacles in the way of negotiation for peace. It would confirm in France the unmolested enjoyment of its ancient territory, and give to all other nations, that tranquillity, that security, which they are now compelled to seek by other means.

"But it is not to this mode that his majesty limits the possibility of solid pacification; he makes no claim to preferre to France what shall be the form of her government, or in whose hands she shall vest the authority necessary for conducting the affairs of a great and powerful nation.

"His majesty only looks to the security of his own dominions, of his allies, and of Europe. Whenever he shall judge it can be in any manner attained, he will eagerly embrace the opportunity, to concert with his allies the means of an immediate and general peace.

"Unhappily at present no such security exists; no sufficient evidence of the principles by which the new government will be directed, no reasonable ground of its stability, appears. In this situation, therefore, it remains for his majesty to pursue, in conjunction with other powers, those exertions of a just and defensive war, which a regard to the happiness of his subjects will never permit him to continue beyond the necessity in which they originated, or to terminate on any other foundation than such as would contribute to the secure enjoyment of their tranquillity, their constitution, and their independence."

As one of the principal objects, on account of which Bonaparte commenced this negotiation, undoubtedly was to cast upon Great Britain the odium of the continuance of the war; he persevered in this purpose with considerable dexterity: He appeared not to be disconcerted by the first rejection of his offers, and continued the correspondence through the medium of Talleyrand, his minister for foreign affairs, who, in a note in answer to that of Lord Grenville, began with a recrimination respecting the origin of the war; in which he presented a picture of a design and colouring totally different from that which his lordship had portrayed in his letter. The charge of aggression, of which the French nation were accused, was haughtily repulsed, and retorted on the coalesced powers, and particularly on the British government. After expatiating on this subject, the French minister observed, that a sincere desire for peace ought to lead the parties to the discovery of the means of terminating the war, rather than apologies or recriminations respecting its commencement; that no doubt was entertained but that the right of the French nation to choose its own government, was a point which would not be contested, asserting that the British crown was held on no other tenure; that at a time when the republic professed neither the solidity nor the force which it now professed, negotiations had been twice solicited by the British cabinet, and carried into effect: that the reasons for discontinuing the war were become not less urgent; on the contrary, the calamities into which the renovation of the war must infallibly plunge the whole of Europe, were motives which had induced the first consul to propose a suspension of arms, which might likewise influence the other belligerent powers. The minister concluded with pressing this object so far as to propose the town of Dunkirk, or any other, for the meeting of plenipotentiaries, in order to accelerate the re-establishment of peace and amity between the French republic and England.

In the answer of the British minister to this note, Answ. by the recrimination of aggression was as contemptuously the British repulsed as it had been haughtily urged: Referring to court, his former note, the minister observed, that the obstructions which had been presented, rendered hopeless for the moment any advantages which might be expected from a negotiation; that all the representations made with so much confidence by the French minister, the personal dispositions of those in power, the solidity and confidence of the new government, were points which could not be admitted as motives for opening a negotiation, since these considerations remained yet to be proved, and of which the only evidence must be that already explained by his majesty, namely, the result of experience, and the evidence of facts.

On the 22d of January, copies of this correspondence were presented to the British parliament, along with a message from his majesty, announcing that he relied on the support of his parliament, and the zeal and perseverance of his subjects, in such measures as would best confirm the signal advantages obtained in the last campaign, and conduct the contest to an honourable conclusion. On the 28th of the same month, the subject was discussed in the house of lords upon a motion made by Lord Grenville for an address of thanks to his majesty in consequence of the message. Lord Grenville contended, that nothing in the state of Europe admitted of a rational hope, that there was any security but in war; that peace with a nation at enmity with order, justice, religion, and morality, would rather be an acquiescence with the wrong than a suspension of arms in ordinary warfare. In these times, when the differences that agitated states were of no common origin; when indeed they were the offspring of a mad and maddening system of innovation; the work of peace should be entered upon with caution, and pursued with jealousy. To negotiate with established governments was formerly not merely easy, but safe; but to negotiate now with the government of France, would incur all the risks of an uncertain truce, without one of the benefits of a temporary peace. He entered into a comment upon the note of the French minister, and disputed all its positions. He said that the love of peace, on the part of France, had been displayed in a war of eight years with every nation in Europe excepting Sweden and Denmark; that her disinclination of conquest had been ascertained by the invasion of the Netherlands, of Italy, of Switzerland; and even of Asia. He contended, that no honourable or permanent peace could be made with the present rulers of France. Every power with which she had treated could furnish melancholy instances of the perfidy, injustice, and cruelty of the republic. If she agreed to a suspension of arms, it was in order to be be admitted into the state of the negotiating prince, that he might then undermine his throne by corrupting the principles of his subjects. The duke of Tuscany was among the early sufferers by a treaty. He strove to conform his conduct in every respect to the views of France; but at the moment when he pledged her honour for the security of his state, he saw the troops of his ally enter his capital, the governor of that city imprisoned, his subjects in a state of rebellion, and himself about to be exiled from his dominions. It was to this prince, however, that the republic repeated her assurances of attachment. That very republic, which fought not conquest, which declared she would not interfere with the government of other states, deposed the sovereign and gave democracy to the Florentines. A similar conduct had been observed towards the king of Sardinia, the king of Naples, and the republics of Venice, Genoa, and Switzerland. He repeated the affront, in which he had always persevered, that France had been the original aggressor in the war. His lordship next proceeded to investigate the character of the present ruler of the French nation.

He remarked, that General Bonaparte, in the third year of the republic, imposed upon the French, by the mouth of the cannon, that very constitution which he had now destroyed by the point of the bayonet. If a treaty was concluded and broken with Sardinia, it was concluded and broken by Bonaparte; if peace was established and violated with Tuscany, it was established and violated by Bonaparte; if armistices were ratified and annulled with Modena, and the other petty states of Italy, they were ratified and annulled by Bonaparte; if that ancient republic, Venice, was first drawn into a war, and compelled afterwards to conclude a treaty, it was that Bonaparte might more easily overthrow her constitution, and annihilate the political system by which she had existed with glory and security for ages past; if the government of Rome was subverted, it was subverted by Bonaparte; if Genoa was reduced to the same humiliating situation, her wealth and independence were sacrificed to Bonaparte; if Switzerland, deluded by offers of peace, was induced to surrender up her rights and liberties, she was deprived of them by Bonaparte. But to examine that part of his conduct which is diplomatic, and passing over his capacities, and the cruel massacres which were perpetrated by his orders, let us review his professions to the Porte: he solemnly declared, that he had no intention of taking possession of Egypt; whilst he declared to his own generals that this was his intention, and to the people of Egypt that it was with the consent of the Porte. He had multiplied violations of all moral and religious ties; he had repeated acts of perfidy; his hypocrisies were innumerable, and in that country where he had affirmed the French to be true Muslims, he had given us a correct idea of his sincerity and his principles.

Being thus provided with so many unquestionable pledges of his future integrity, was it illiberal or impolitic to suspect a man, who having overturned the government of his own country, as he had done that of others, now came forward with offers of pacification. If the interest of Bonaparte were deeply concerned he might be sincere, and there was no doubt but it was his interest to consolidate his power; but it ought not to be forgotten, that whenever any acts of atrocity were to be accomplished by the French, they had been usually effected by a suspension of arms. The proposed negotiation would relieve her from the present pressure of alarming difficulties, and could not relieve England from any; the ports of France, which were now blockaded by our fleet and cruisers, would be thrown open to introduce naval stores, and a variety of necessary articles, of which the country was in want; fleets would be sent to bring back the troops which were now deprived of all intercourse with the republic, and which might then be employed in augmenting the numbers of the French armies. To us a suspension of arms could not be productive of any benefit whatever; our ports were not blocked up, our commerce was not interrupted; and it also should be considered, that there would be no security for the maintenance of such a suspension. Was Bonaparte now prepared to sign a general peace? If he were not, he could not be sincere in his offers. It was necessary for him to keep an army of 60,000 men to preserve tranquillity in the interior of France; every act of his government was supported by force; and if he even were sincere, it was hazarding too much to hazard all on his single life. What reliance could be placed on the unanimity of the French people? Were we destitute of hope from the change which had recently taken place in the persons employed in public offices? Men of the blackest characters had been appointed to situations of the greatest trust; men infamous for professed principles of anarchy, had been raised to places of confidence and power; and those who were judges in the sanguinary tribunals of Robespierre, were now exalted to a distinguished rank in the republic: whilst, therefore, the jacobin system prevailed in France, there was no security for England but by a vigorous prosecution of hostilities.

His lordship concluded by disclaiming, on the part of administration, any wish to consider the restoration of the French monarchy as the object of the war; he considered the restoration of monarchy as the best, the surest and speediest, but not as the only means of restoring peace: his majesty, he said, would not hesitate to treat with any form of government capable of preserving the customary relations of amity; but to commence a negotiation which would not be likely to terminate in peace, would be dishonourable and fruitless.

The duke of Bedford opposed the secretary's motion for the address. He contended, that all the objections against negotiation might have been urged against the negotiations which the ministers themselves had formerly opened at Lisle. He considered the conduct of the British government, on the present occasion, as unwise; because provoking and unconciliatory. He thought, that, in a correspondence with the present French government, all discussion about the original commencement of the war ought to have been avoided. Whether England or France were the first aggressor, was a question to be referred to posterity; it was natural for each country to throw the imputation off their own shoulders, and avoid not only the execration of the present age, but the curse of posterity. The wild scheme of restoring the French monarchy, was the fine Britain, quanon, if not of peace, of negotiation; for notwithstanding the noble secretary had denied the charge, whilst he pointed out the imposibility of treating with the French government during all its stages to the present, and inflicted upon vigorous hostilities being the only means of our security, there was no inference to be drawn, but that the war must be continued till monarchy was established. What prospect remained of such an event taking place, his grace said he would not pretend to determine; but this fact was certain, that, in the same proportion as this country oppressed France, in the same proportion did she become violent; our attempts to destroy Jacobinism promoted, and if we persevered, would establish it. If the restoration of monarchy was not the object, what was it? Were ministers contending that we ought to wait for a more favourable opportunity of entering into negotiation? Was it to be obtained by railing at Bonaparte? There were no terms sufficiently strong to censure the littleness which attacked his character, in order to ruin him in the elimination of the French nation, as if, by so doing, we could negotiate with more effect, or gain a fairer prospect of peace.

The duke of Bedford next contended, that no confidence was to be repose in our present continental allies; and as a severe scarcity at this period prevailed in the country, this circumstance was made use of, as an additional argument against persevering in the war. We had been taught to believe, said his grace, that this country was able to starve France; now, if we took a view of our own internal situation, we should find it alarming in an extreme degree. If we repaired to the woods, we should everywhere discover traces of those miserable wretches whose poverty left them no resources but depredation; if we contemplated the villages, we should hear only the unavailing cries of children, calling for that food which their parents had not to give them. Numerous were the instances, of strong and healthy country men, appealing from parish officers, who had denied them assistance on the ground of their being able to work: it was true, that they had ability, but no employment; and, left without it, they were perpetually distressed with the clamours of their families pinching at their miserable homes in wretchedness and want. The beneficence of individuals had indeed much alleviated these evils; but the necessity of affording relief to the laborious parts of the community by charity, was a proof of the weakness of the country. Six months ago, our army had been recruited by unconstitutional measures; the fundamental principle, on which the force of the kingdom was formed, had been violated for the purpose of conducting us to victory; that same army, which we beheld marching with an assurance of success, had been obliged to purchase its retreat from the enemies territory with disgrace. Such were the means we had of obtaining a more favourable opportunity to negotiate. Ought ministers to be suffered to persist, were they to have another secret expedition, to drain the country of its provisions, in order to fill the magazines of the enemy, and to stamp the British character with dishonour? Surely it ought first to be well ascertained, that we had some rational hope of success. The chief confidant, doubtless, fought to make a peace advantageous to himself, and the nation over which he presided. Like all other statesmen, his motives might not be influenced by humanity. It was to be supposed his aim would be to satisfy the French people, and consolidate his own power. As to the abuse which ministers threw upon his character, it was their habit to abuse every ruling power in France. But, whenever they had been driven by the voice of the people to negotiate, their former ill language had never been any impediment. It was unfortunately the interest of ministers to procrastinate the war; they retained their places by its continuance, and when it was ended, the people would inquire for what they had been spending their blood and treasures, and reflect on the heavy calamities they endured, without having reaped the least advantage by the contest. The duke of Bedford concluded his speech with a motion for an address, recommending a negotiation for peace.

Lord Borington said, he would not pretend to determine what might be the real disposition of the first confidant relative to general pacification; but it was remarkable, that though his majesty, with that good faith so well becoming his character as well as that of the nation, expressly stated his intentions of acting only in concert with his allies, not one word should be said respecting peace with them; he argued, therefore, that even if we had acceded to the French propositions, it was probable we might have left in existence the continental war; we might have enabled France to have strengthened and recruited her forces, basely have allowed her to bring them out against the powers now in alliance with us, and have put into the hands of the successors of Bonaparte a power more formidable than that now enjoyed by himself; more formidable from the principles of those who might direct it, and, above all, from the abject state in which it would most assuredly find this country, under such circumstances. It was impossible to conceive means more calculated to damp the ardour, and check the enterprise of our fleets, to destroy the discipline and spirit of our armies, and diffuse distrust and despondency into the public mind, than the hasty conclusion of a temporary peace.

Lord Holland reproved the conduct of ministers throughout the contest. At one time they asserted, that the ambition of France was so insatiable, that she would listen to no terms; they were now driven from that pretext, and they urged that a peace would be insecure. As to the ambition of the enemy, it was a consideration of weight in the arrangement of terms, not a preliminary objection preclusive of treaty. What proof could be given of the abandonment of dangerous views, but a negotiation in which moderation could be displayed. It was urged, that Bonaparte might be insincere; but if he was not, he could only have done precisely what he had done. Was it reasonable to suppose that he would admit, that the guilt of the aggression lay with France? This was a point which ought not to have been discussed. The object was to treat on actual circumstances, and the real grounds of dispute. It was not Talleyrand who began the subject; he did not, like our ministers, throw out severe reproach and pointed insult; he merely stated, that the possibility of arrangement, not the original offence, was now the question. Suppose that Bonaparte, desirous to attain peace by any means, should sit down to consider how he could succeed. What does the note allow him to do? He would find that the restoration of the hereditary line of kings was the only case in which a speedy peace would be admitted as possible; in fact, therefore, this restoration was the sine qua non, in which immediate negotiation was admissible with ministers. Now let us examine this condition of peace in two points of view. Was it desirable in itself? Would it remove the objections urged to negotiation? Surely if the ambition of the republic was so formidable, we could not forget this ground of apprehension, when we talked of restoring the house of Bourbon. Had we forgotten their proverbial ambition, and was their restoration the remedy for evils arising from such a source? We had now taken up the principle, so much objected to jacobins, of distinguishing between the people and their government; but what was the conduct of the French? Bonaparte distinctly renounces this principle in the letter to the king, and acknowledges the title and the character of his majesty's government. The note of our ministers was a manifesto to the royalists, and formed for that purpose. It spoke of the miseries of France; but the miseries of France were not the causes of the war: they might interest our humanity, but were not to be urged as motives in diplomatic papers. As little had we to do with the internal miseries of the republic, as Talleyrand would have to retaliate, by reproaching us with the test act, the want of parliamentary reform, affected taxes, or any other of our grievances.

Lord Holland asserted, that the people at large approved of the abrupt rejection of Bonaparte's overtures; and if it afterwards should appear, that he was sincere, how would their lordships reconcile it to their consciences, to have prolonged by their sanction the calamities of war, without any motive of honour, interest, or security? He therefore gave his decided support to the amendment.

The earl of Carnarvon said, he would not consider the answer of our ministers as a refusal to treat for peace, or a declaration of eternal war; it was, as the secretary of state had termed it, a call upon the house and the country, to pause before they rashly suffered themselves to enter into a negotiation with an unsettled government. He did not expect any extraordinary faith to be manifested by Bonaparte, more than by any other chief or chiefs: but although he should be best pleased with the restoration of monarchy in France; in all times, in monarchies as well as republics, aristocracies, and every other species of government, good faith in treaties was preserved, and exemplified, only so long as it was the interest of the parties to maintain it. So little integrity had history left on record, that at the very time they were signed, a secret intention was often indulged to violate them at a particular period. The address, as moved by Lord Grenville, was carried by a majority of 79 against 6.

In the house of commons, Mr Dundas moved a similar address, which gave rise to a similar debate. Mr Dundas said, that the leading feature of the French revolution was a disregard of all treaties, and a contempt for the rights of other powers; in proof of this assertion, he considered it as necessary, merely to recite the names of Spain, Naples, Sardinia, Tuscany, Genoa, Geneva, Modena, Austria, Russia, England, and Egypt, with Denmark and Sweden, though at all times neutral states. He contended, that Britain had not at this time any reasonable cause to suppose that a change of principles had taken place. The Jacobinical form of government was at an end indeed; but, in substance and essence, all the qualities of the revolutionary government were in as full force at this moment as they were in the days of Robespierre. All power was now consolidated and concentrated in the hands of Bonaparte; and the nation stood with a military depot at its head, invested with unlimited authority to revive the practice of forced loans and requisitions, to wield the force of the state as he pleased, and resort to all the resources of the revolutionary government.

Under these circumstances, overtures are made for peace. This proposition ministers have thought proper to reject, assigning as the cause, that, as all the former attempts had proved abortive, or, if successful, were followed by violation, nothing yet presented itself which afforded security. In the first place, we were not assured of the sincerity of the offer, and in the second, of its permanency. There were certain circumstances which inspired confidence in states, as the character of the king of a country, the conduct of his ministers, the general laws of the government; but was there one of these criteria to be found in the present case? If there were none of them to be found, it relied solely on the assertion of the party himself declaring he was of a pacific disposition, accredited by his minister Talleyrand; for to him he had referred to vouch for his character. It was not, however, the business of this country, to judge the private character of Bonaparte; at the same time, he must confess, that he had an old prejudice hanging about him, so as to induce him to regard the blasphemer of his God, as not the person with whom he would wish to treat. But, waving these objections, he was to be considered in the character in which he forced himself upon the house, namely, as professing a pacific disposition, and proposing a negotiation with us. Here Mr Dundas particularized, with much severity, the conduct of Bonaparte, in the various kingdoms and states which he had before named; and concluded with observing, there was not a single one with which he had not violated his faith; and affirmed there to be strong reasons for withholding confidence, and rejecting treaty. Mr Dundas contended, that a negotiation at this period would be equivalent to a defection of our allies, and would surrender the continent of Europe to France; that we should uphold the usurpation of Bonaparte, while at the same time, we could have so little confidence in his good faith, that even, were the negotiation to terminate successfully, Great Britain could not venture to disarm.

Mr Whitbread asserted, that, had it not been for the interference and ambition of the other powers of Europe, the French revolution would have assumed a very different character from that which it now possessed. He remarked, that other powers had treated neutral states no less unjustly than had been done by the French; Lord Harvey and Lord Hood had ordered the French ministers to be dismissed from Florence, and by threats we had compelled Genoa to dismiss her French inhabitants. Britain. tants. He compared Bonaparte with Suvarrow, and the invasion of Egypt by France, with that of Poland by Austria, Russia, and Prussia, whose friendship we had frequently courted.

Mr Thomas Erskine entered at great length into the question, upon which he himself had previously published a pamphlet, whether France or Great Britain had been guilty of the original aggression in the war. He contended that the British government had unnecessarily engaged in it, and persisted without necessity; and strenuously refuted the propriety of giving any approbation to the part which administration had acted in the late correspondence.

Mr Pitt on the other hand asserted, that the French leaders had themselves begun the war, on the principle that it was necessary to consolidate the revolution. With regard to the proposal to negotiate with their present leader, he said that it was impossible to discuss fairly its propriety, without taking into consideration his personal character and conduct. Some gentlemen indeed had represented this as irritating and invincible; but no minister could discharge his duty, without flouting the principles and dispositions of the person with whom we were to treat, since the stability of the treaty must depend on these circumstances. Mr Pitt here expatiated on the conduct of Bonaparte at Campoformio, in the Milanese, Genoa, Modena, Tuscany, Rome, Venice, Switzerland, and Egypt: his arts of perfidy, he said, were commensurate with his number of treaties; and if we traced the history of the men in this revolution whose conduct had been marked by the most atrocious cruelty, the name of Bonaparte would be found allied to more of them than that of any other within these ten eventful and disastrous years.

From those facts the house might judge what reliance might reasonably be placed on this conqueror, and what degree of credit might be given to his professions. It had been observed, indeed, that whatever had been his character, he had now an interest in making and preserving peace. This was to him a doubtful proposition; that it was his interest to negotiate with this country separately, in order to dissolve the whole system of the confederacy on the continent; to rally at once the arms of Russia, of Austria, or of any other country which might look to us for support; and then either to break off his separate treaty; or if he should have concluded it, to apply the lesson taught in his school of policy in Egypt, and to revive at his pleasure those claims of indemnification, which may have been referred to some happier period.

Under all these circumstances of his personal character, and his newly acquired power, what security had he for retaining that power but the sword? His hold upon France was the sword, and he had no other. Was he connected with the soil or with the habits, the affections or the prejudices of the country? No: he was a stranger, a foreigner, and a usurper. He united in his own person every thing that a pure republican must detest; every thing which an enraged jacobin had abused; every thing which a faithful royalist must feel an insult. If he was opposed in his career, he appealed to his army. Placing then his whole dependence on military support, could he afford to permit his military renown to pass away, his laurels to wither, and his trophies to sink in obscurity? Was it certain that, with his army confined within France, and restrained from inroads upon her neighbours, he could maintain at his devotion a force sufficiently numerous to uphold his power? Having no object but dominion, no passion but glory, was it probable that he could feel such an interest in permanent peace as would justify our laying down our arms, reducing our expense, and relinquishing our means of security, on the faith of his engagements?

But was the inference to be drawn from these considerations, that we ought in no case to treat with Bonaparte? No: but we ought to wait for the evidence of facts. If there should be an appearance that France was governed by other maxims of policy from those which had hitherto prevailed; when there were signs of a stable government, which were not now to be traced; if the danger of the contest should increase, whilst the hope of ultimate success should be diminished, all these would have their due weight: but at present there was nothing from which we could prefigure a favourable disposition to change in the French consuls. There was the greatest reason to rely on powerful cooperation from our allies; the strongest marks in the interior of France of a disposition to resist this new tyranny; and every reason to believe, that if we were disappointed of complete success, the continuance of the contest, instead of making our situation comparatively worse, would have made it comparatively better.

It might be necessary, Mr Pitt remarked, to take notice of the negotiation at Lille in 1797, to which allusions had been frequently made by the opponents of administration. The jacobin system of prodigality and bloodshed, by which the efforts of France had been supported, had at that period driven us to exertions which had exhausted the ordinary means of defraying our immense expenditure, and led many who were convinced of the necessity of the war to doubt the possibility of persisting in it. There seemed too much reason to believe, that, without some new measure to check the accumulation of debt, we could no longer trust to the funding system, by which the nation had supported the different wars in which we had been engaged during the present century. The general and decided concurrence of public opinion was necessary in order to prosecute our plans with vigour. Under this impression we negotiated, not from the sanguine hope that its result would be permanent security; but from the persuasion, that the danger arising from peace in these circumstances would be less than the continuance of war with inadequate means. Those negotiations have fully proved, that the enemy would be satisfied with nothing less than the sacrifice of the honour of our country; and from this conviction a spirit and enthusiasm was excited in the nation which produced the subsequent happy change in our situation.

Mr Fox asserted, that France undoubtedly at the commencement of the war was the defending party: the aggressions of Austria and Prussia could not be denied by any impartial person; nothing could be more decidedly hostile than their proceedings; they scrupled not to declare to France, that it was her internal concerns, not her outward actions, which provoked them to confederate against her; they did not pretend pretend to fear her ambition, her conquests, her troubling her neighbours; but they accused her of new-modelling her own government. In all this he was not seeking to justify the French, either in their internal or external policy; on the contrary, he thought their successive rulers had been as execrable, in various instances, as any of the most despotic and unprincipled governments which the world had ever seen; and it was impossible that it should have been otherwise: men bred in the school of the house of Bourbon, once engaged in foreign wars, would naturally endeavour to spread destruction, and form plans of aggrandisement on every side; they could not have lived so long under their ancient masters, without imbibing the insatiable ambition and restless spirit, the perfidy and the despotism, inherent in the race; they had imitated their great prototype; and through their whole career of crimes, had done no more than trace the steps of their own Louis XIV. Are we forever, continued Mr Fox, to deprive ourselves of the benefits of peace, because France has perpetrated acts of injustice? With the knowledge of these acts, we had treated with them twice; and ought not now to refuse to do so; much less ought we to regard any improper language which the French leaders have used. Bonaparte had declared the two governments of Great Britain and France could not exist together, and deputed Berthier and Monge to make known this sentiment to the directory after the treaty at Campoformio. And had not Mr Pitt declared the same thing in that house. If we were to bring up all the idle speeches of the French, and they were to repeat ours, there would be no end to these reciprocations of animosity. Much, Mr Fox remarked, had been said of the short-lived nature of military despotism; yet such was the government erected by Augustus Cæsar, which endured 600 years. Indeed it was too likely to be durable wherever it was established. Nor was it true that it depended on the life of the first usurper; half of the Roman emperors were murdered, yet the tyranny continued; and this, it was to be feared, would be the case in France. Neither would it make any difference in our relation with that country if Bonaparte were removed, because the purchasers of confiscated property, amounting, it was said, to one million and a half of persons, must prove an insurmountable obstacle to the restoration of the ancient monarchy and the nobility. Mr Fox concluded by remarking that if administration wished to include the allies of Britain in the proposed negociation, they should have said so to Bonaparte, and not have insisted upon keeping him some time longer at war, as a state of probation; but the fact appeared to be, that contrary to the wishes of administration, the people of England were friends to peace, and hence ministers were apprehensive that Bonaparte might agree to their proposal, and thereby deprive them of all pretext for the continuance of hostilities. The address was carried upon a division of 260 against 64.

The great measure of a legislative union with Ireland was carried into effect during the present session of parliament. Administration had found it necessary to delay this interesting affair, in consequence of the strength of the opposition to it in the Irish parliament; but during the recess they had obtained a more ample majority. The British parliament, upon Mr Pitt's motion, had passed resolutions in favour of the union. The business was formally introduced to the Irish parliament on the 5th of February 1800, by a message from the lord-lieutenant, in which his excellency stated, that he had it in command from his majesty, to lay before the houses of legislature, the resolutions of the British parliament; and to express his majesty's wish, that they would take the same into their most serious consideration, &c. After a long and spirited debate, the ministry prevailed, by a majority of 43, for taking his majesty's message into consideration on the Wednesday following. The distinguished abilities of Mr Grattan, which had been voluntarily cast into obscurity, were once more brought before the public on this interesting occasion. In a debate, which took place on the 17th of February, on proposing the first article of the union, he opposed the measure with such bountiful degree of vehemence, that the chancellor of the exchequer accused him of associating with traitors, and of disaffection to the government. The reply of Mr Grattan was so pointed and severe, that the chancellor conceived himself under the necessity of resenting it by a challenge; five shots were exchanged, and the chancellor (Mr Corry) was wounded in the arm. The question, however, was carried by a majority of 161 against 115, and as the discussion proceeded, the numbers of opposition appeared to diminish. The last struggle, as it may be deemed, was made on the 13th of March, when Sir John Parnell moved to petition his majesty to call a new parliament, in order that the sense of their constituents might be more fully ascertained; but this motion was overruled by a majority of 46. In the mean time, the business proceeded with little opposition in the house of lords, and on the 24th of March that house adopted the whole of the articles of union with a few alterations. On the Friday following both houses waited on his excellency with a joint address to that effect, which was afterwards transmitted to Great Britain; and no time was lost by the ministers in submitting the measure anew to the British parliament.

On the 2d of April, a message from his majesty was presented to each of the houses of the British parliament, communicating the resolutions of the Irish parliament in favour of an entire union between the two kingdoms, and recommending the speedy execution of a work so interesting to the security and prosperity of the British empire.

In the house of lords the measure was opposed by Lord Holland, chiefly for this reason, that an union at Britain on the present period was not the spontaneous offer of the Irish parliament of Ireland, uninfluenced by corruption or union menace. The whole articles of the union were afterwards moved, and carried, in a committee of the house, after some debates of no great importance.

In the house of commons similar debates occurred. Mr Pitt stated, that the principal article in the treaty; that of the share of representation which Ireland was to have in the united parliament, was founded upon a comparative statement of the population of both kingdoms, as well as the revenue of both. The number of members, fixed for the counties and two principal cities, was 68; and those for the most considerable... considerable cities, towns, and boroughs, were regulated at 31, who would be selected without partiality. Having adverted to the article respecting the number of representatives for the commons of Ireland, on the ground that they could afford no cause of suspicion as to any increase of the influence of the crown, he next adverted to the arrangements respecting the house of peers, and the members to be returned; and said, as the members for the commons of Ireland were nearly double in number to those of Scotland, the same rules would be observed with the peerage, which therefore was to consist of 32 members. It was also understood, that such peers of Ireland as might not be among the 28 temporal peers, should be allowed to sit in the united parliament until elected. Such a measure, in his opinion, could not be thought unconstitutional. He remarked, that the only article, consisting of minute details, related to apportioning the shares of the revenue of each country respectively. He said, it was a circumstance much to be wished, that the finances of both countries were so nearly alike, that the system of both could be identified; but, as from the different proportions of debt, and the different stages of civilization and commerce, and the different wealth of the countries, that desirable object was rendered impracticable, he contended, however, that the advantage of an union ought not to be deferred, because it could not at once be carried to its full extent.

Mr Grey opposed the union in the present state of affairs. He said, that it had been asserted, in a speech of the lord-lieutenant to the Irish parliament, that five-sevenths of the country, and all the principal commercial towns, except Dublin, had petitioned in favour of the union. He said, this only meant, that 19 counties had presented petitions, and that these counties constitute five-sevenths of the surface of Ireland. He admitted the petitions in favour of the union; but by what means were they obtained? The lord-lieutenant who, besides being the chief civil magistrate, is commander of a disciplined army of 170,000 men, who is able to proclaim martial law when he pleases, and to establish the military trial of a court-martial, in his progress through the kingdom, procured these petitions, which, he said, were signed by few names, and those by no means the most respectable. Fortunately, said Mr Grey, there were many petitions on the other side, which were not obtained by solicitation and at illegal meetings, but at public assemblies, of which legal notice had been given. Twenty-seven counties had petitioned against the measure. The petition from the county of Downe was signed by 17,000 respectable independent men; and all others were in a similar proportion. Upon this Mr Grey spoke at some length, and begged the attention of the committee, while he adverted to some of the favourite arguments of unionists. Their grand source of argument, he said, was the experience of the benefits derived from the union with Scotland. He had attended to that point, and he could see, after the most mature deliberation, no analogy between the circumstances of the Scotch union and those which called for an union with Ireland, nor could he apprehend that the same consequences would follow from them. In the union between Scotland and England, there was no physical impediment; the relative situation of the two countries was such, that the king himself could administer the executive government in both; there was no occasion for a separate establishment being kept up in each. The great difference, said Mr Grey, between Scotland and England, was not between people and people, but between parliament and parliament. The Scots had prohibited the importation of English goods into Scotland; they had established a trading company, which interfered with the colonial arrangements of England, and nearly embroiled her with Spain; they had refused to limit the succession of the crown, and even enacted, that it should not descend to the same person with the crown of England. An act was about to have been brought into the English parliament, to render all Scotsmen aliens, and another to fit out a fleet to attack all Scots vessels they should fall in with. Here, Mr Grey observed, there was no alternative but union or war. If the union should, in this case, be carried into effect notwithstanding the general disapprobation of the people, he wished that it might tend to strengthen the connection between the two countries, as much as he believed in his conscience, that it threatened the only solid bond of connection, that of affection and kindness, and that it must prove injurious to the real power of the state. Mr Grey concluded, by moving an address to his majesty, requesting a suspension of all proceedings relative to the union, till the sentiments of the people of Ireland could be ascertained.

Mr Sheridan represented the measure as an act of tyranny towards the people of Ireland, which must become the fatal source of new discontentments and future rebellions. Mr Grey's motion was rejected, on a division of 236 against 30.

Early in the present session of parliament, mention had been made by opposition of the unfortunate invasion of Holland by the British forces; but ministers declined entering upon the subject, as the whole expedition had been carried on under the superintendence of Mr Secretary Dundas; and that gentleman, speedily after the meeting of parliament, had gone down to Scotland in the depth of winter, without any offensive business; a circumstance which gave rise to suspicions, that some dissatisfactions existed at court, on account of the result of the Dutch invasion, or the manner in which the duke of York had been supported in it by administration at home.

On the 10th of February, the subject was introduced into the house of commons, by Mr Sheridan, who the Dutch moved for an inquiry into the causes of its failure. He treated the capture of the Dutch navy as of little value, or rather as pernicious, on account of the example of mutiny, which it exhibited on the part of the seamen, whom we had received into our service. He admitted, that the restoration of the stadtholder was, in some measure, a justifiable motive for our interference; but contended, that Britain had treated the people of Holland ill, by obliging them to enter into the present war, and by avoiding to promise a restoration of their colonies, in case of a successful invasion. In these circumstances, he thought the British government had acted imprudently in expecting any assistance from Dutchmen. He asserted, that the expedition itself was ill arranged, as the army, after its landing, had no means of moving forward, on account of the want of necessaries. The result was, that instead of of delivering the Dutch, the British army was under the necessity of entering into capitulation for its escape, and of holding out as an inducement to enter into this capitulation, a threat, in case of its being refused by the enemy, to destroy forever the means of commerce of that very people whom we embarked to save. He contended, that to vindicate the honour of the British army, it was necessary to inquire into the cause of its misfortunes upon this occasion.

Mr Dundas defended the expedition against Holland with great ability. He stated its object to be threefold: 1st, To relieve the United Provinces from the tyranny of the French; 2ndly, To add to the efficient force of this country, and diminish that of the enemy, by gaining possession of the Dutch fleet; and, lastly, By hostile operations in Holland, to oblige the French to weaken their armies in other quarters. Mr Dundas contended, that at the commencement of the expedition, a great probability existed of the success of all these objects; two of them did actually succeed, and only one failed.

Mr Dundas remarked, that it was a maxim adopted by the wisest politicians, from the earliest period of our connexion with Holland, to protect its independence both against France and Spain. Queen Elizabeth gave them assistance for this purpose. King William followed the same policy, and it had been uniformly observed under the house of Brunswick. It could not surely be more criminal in us to attempt to rescue the same provinces from the French republic, which we had protected against the house of Bourbon.

With regard to the capture of the fleet, Mr Dundas declared himself astonished, that a doubt should exist about the value of such an acquisition. That fleet had been absolutely destined for the invasion of our dominions; along with it we took nearly 7000 seamen, all of whom were liable to be employed in the French fleet, and 40,000 tons of shipping, which might have annoyed our commerce.

By the invasion of Holland, Mr Dundas asserted, that the French were compelled to weaken their other armies, which gave success to Suwarrow, in driving them from Italy, and to the archduke on the upper Rhine and Switzerland. They had indeed succeeded in defending Holland; but, as the price of this success, they had been severely pressed in every other quarter. Had the French followed the plan formerly adopted by them, they could not have prevented our recovering Holland. At the moment our enterprise was undertaken, it was a doubt whether they would place their reinforcements there, or in other parts of the continent. They poured their prodigious reinforcements into Holland, by which means we were unable to rescue it from their yoke; but another part of the result was, that they lost every other point which they contested, in the whole campaign, in every other place. Mr Dundas asserted, that administration were highly justifiable in undertaking the expedition, in consequence of their knowledge of the inclinations of the people of Holland; but he declined making known upon this subject the secrets of government. Never, said he, was a commencement more prosperous than that of the late expedition. Sir Ralph Abercrombie sailed for the Helder the 13th of August, and everything promised the most rapid success. On the 14th came on the most extraordinary hurricane that ever blew from the heavens; it was impossible to land a single soldier on any part of the coast of Holland; and this continued till the 27th: the consequence was, that the enemy knew where our fleet must land, and the troops came in shoals to oppose us; 7000 men were collected; and as they were superior in number, Sir Ralph could not land his men to advantage. The ardour of the soldiers and the gallantry of the commander were never excelled on any occasion. Without anything but their muskets and bayonets, (for they had not the power of bringing with them a single field-piece) against cavalry and artillery, they made their landing good, and by it they secured the Dutch fleet. He stated these things, to show how easy it was to censure both soldiers and their generals unjustly upon an event depending on the temper of the elements. It was alleged, that the troops had no means to draw their waggons; but they had no waggons, and could not possibly have landed them had they been there. Instantly on their landing they could not want them; for all they immediately had to do, was to secure a landing place, and a post of communication. Sir Ralph had to consider what position he should take till the 1st of September, when reinforcements should arrive. He judged wisely for the dispositions of the army; and the delay arose from causes which no human wisdom could foresee, and therefore could not prevent. Had he been able to land when he expected, he would according to all probability have commanded complete success to all the objects of his expedition. The same wind prevented the Russian troops from arriving to reinforce ours; they did not come till the 18th. The duke of York offered the Russian general, D'Hermann, to delay the attack, if he thought his men were not sufficiently recovered from the fatigues of the voyage; but the general requested that the attack should be made, with a promptitude and alacrity which reflected the highest honour upon him. But this ardour led him to the field full two hours sooner than the time appointed. The army, however, was gloriously successful till a late hour in the day. General D'Hermann and his troops were in possession of the village of Berghen, and crowned with victory, till his zeal led him beyond a given point, and turned the fate of it. When the attack was made, the French amounted to 7000, and the Dutch to 12,000 men; yet, notwithstanding this superiority of force, our troops fought and conquered them with a spirit which immortalized the battle; but the French continually pouring in reinforcements, the duke was advised by General Abercromby, and all the other officers, to accede to the terms of an armistice, which was by that time mutually wished. The duke yielded to this advice, and, by so doing, consulted the dictates of reason and humanity.

Mr Dundas contended, that our army returned with as much honour as they entered Holland. The duke of York, indeed, agreed to give up 8000 French prisoners on condition that his retreat should be unmolested; but he could not be wrong in doing so, because our prisons were overloaded with them, and he did not recede from any one article in which national dignity was concerned; he resisted with firmness and indignation every proposition for restoring the fleet. An attempt had been made to magnify the loss of lives, and the expense attending the expedition: the one had been stated as equivalent to the income tax; five or seven millions: the other at the loss of 10,000 men. There was no occasion to leave this point to conjecture; the expenditure actually amounted to £1,42,000l. and computing by Dr. and Cr. there would in commercial consideration be no objection to it. We had a right to consider the ships which were taken, and to state the reduction for the maintenance of a fleet in the north seas to check a Dutch fleet: If we calculated the value of the former, the decrease of expense in the latter, and the saving in the pay of 10,000 seamen voted lost the last year, the balance was greatly in our favour. We gave up the 8000 prisoners, who were annually fed at a great expense, and gained 6000 Dutch seamen to man our fleets. The objects gained by the expedition were the ships, the reduction of the expense, and the great diversion in the French forces which facilitated the victories of the combined armies. Without making it a topic of eloquence, he believed he felt as much as any man for the brave soldiers who composed our army; but in war no important objects would be obtained without the loss of many dear and valuable connexions: those calamities arose inevitably from the situation of a great nation fighting for great objects; for an independent empire, and for existence itself. To remove the impression of our having lost 10,000 men, he would state in detail the returns made during the whole of the campaign.

Sick and wounded admitted into the hospitals, 4980 Sent home out of these hospitals, 2993 The amount of those who died, 185 And the whole of those who were slain, 846

Mr Tierney supported the proposal for an inquiry; he disputed the advantages said to result from it by weakening the French forces in other quarters, as they had actually been everywhere successful at the close of the campaign. He contended, that at least to a secret committee, or in some other form, ministers ought to account for their conduct, and exonerate themselves from suspicions too strong to be removed without proof, by producing the documents (if any such exist) on which this ill-fated expedition had been planned. It was unconstitutional, it was an insult on the house, to say this could not be done consistently with the preservation of secrecy. General Abercromby landed on the 22d of August with 10,000 men; he got possession of the Helder; he was reinforced by General Don on the 27th: Was it not strange, that 15,000, headed by an able general, and going by invitation, should think it imprudent to advance? Had the Dutch been well affected, why did they not declare themselves? No French troops were then in Holland to keep them in awe. Why did not the duke of York fail at the same time with General Don? Why were all our forces sent to one place, and 43,000 men cooped up in a narrow peninsula where but few could act at a time? It was strange that ministers, who were so fond of making diversions, did not think of making a diversion in some other quarter. This was a point which only military men could determine; and the house was bound to examine officers, that the truth might be known. Whether his royal highness concluded the capitulation from instructions, or from his own judgment, he should (in his opinion) have demanded an inquiry; and this was the only way the disgrace could be transferred from himself and the gallant officers who served under him. He had no reason to apologize for the liberties he used with the name of his royal highness, although he might one day become his sovereign; for he would not think the worse of that Englishman who was most solicitous for the honours of the British army. We gave up 8000 seamen, who it seems were mere lumber: had his royal highness been of the same opinion, he would not have hesitated in complying with this requisition of General Brune, but instantly have made the surrender of the prisoners. The capitulation had fixed an indelible blot on the national character: A king's son, commanding 40,000 men, capitulated to a French general who had only 35,000.

Mr Addington observed, that having maturely and dispassionately considered the nature of the proposed inquiry, it appeared to him to rest upon two grounds: first, the propriety of judging any measure by its event; and, secondly, that in consequence of a failure, there should be a necessity for investigation. It ought to be recollected, that the worst concerted plans had often produced the most brilliant success, and the best terminated in disaster. No human being could command success, and no existing government control the elements. He concluded with an eulogy on the skill of our generals, and the intrepidity of our army. The proposed inquiry was rejected by a majority of 216 against 45.

The supplies during the present year were estimated Revenue at 39 millions and a half, to which a million and a half was afterwards added: loans were negotiated to the amount of 20 millions and a half, and the income tax was mortgaged to a considerable amount.

During the present year the war was extremely Treaty of El Arifh eventful. The army which Bonaparte had left in Egypt under General Kleber could not fail to be disgusted by the defection of the first leader of the expedition. Accordingly a negotiation was entered into by Kleber with the Turkish grand vizier, and Sir Sidney Smith; the result of which was, that the French agreed to abandon the whole of Egypt, on condition of being permitted to return unmolested to France. The agreement was concluded on the 24th of January, and the return home of this discontented army might have proved dangerous, if not fatal, to the newly established power of the first consul: but here the fortune of Bonaparte interposed. The British government, suspecting that some proposals of this kind might be made, sent secret orders to Vice-admiral Lord Keith not to consent to any proposals which might leave such an army at liberty to act in Europe, or which should not include the surrender of all the ships in the port of Alexandria. The consequence was, that Lord Keith refused to fulfil the treaty called the treaty of El Arifh, which Sir Sidney Smith and the Turkish grand vizier had concluded, and detained as prisoners General Desfauix, and a number of troops that had been sent from Egypt. The French general, Kleber, immediately intimated to the Turks a determination to resume hostilities. He attacked and totally routed their army consisting of 40,000 men, in the neighbourhood of Grand Cairo: multitudes perished in the desert and by slaughter, and the French remained masters of the country. country. When it was too late, an order arrived from Britain to permit General Dessaix and his troops along with him to land in France, and to fulfill every part of Sir Sidney Smith's treaty; but the state of affairs had altered, Kleber had been assassinated, and his successor, Menou, refused to evacuate Egypt; in consequence of which it became necessary at a future period to send an army from Britain, to drive the French out of that country.

The Austrian armies in Germany were commanded by General Kray, and in Italy by General Melas. The campaign was conducted on the part of the French government with great ability and decision. It was publicly announced in all the French newspapers, that the armies were to be reinforced as powerfully as possible, and that an army of reserve was to be formed in a critical position between Germany and Italy, from which the armies might be supplied with fresh troops according to the events of the war. Dijon was mentioned as the station of this army of reserve, and that it already amounted to 50,000 men. Nobody suspected that any important plan of operations or military stratagem was concealed by the affected notoriety of this arrangement. Accordingly the Austrians commenced the campaign by an attack upon Massena in the Genoese territory. After a succession of obstinate battles the French were driven into Genoa, where they sustained a siege, till they were compelled to surrender on account of the want of provisions. While Melas besieged Genoa, and even pushed forward his parties through Nice into the ancient French territory, Bonaparte in person suddenly joined at Dijon an immense army, to the assembling of which, as already remarked, Europe at large had paid little attention, on account of the appellation which it had received of an army of reserve. He immediately advanced across the Alps over the mountain of St Bernard; and, as it had been accounted impracticable to transport an army over the rugged mountains and precipices which on that quarter form the barrier of Italy, he descended into the Milanese with little opposition. At the same time powerful reinforcements joined him from Switzerland, of which the French troops continued to hold possession. Bonaparte thus placed himself in the rear of the Austrian general, and hazarded himself and his army upon the fortune of a single battle. He was attacked on the plain of Marengo near Alessandria; and, as the Austrians were greatly superior in cavalry and artillery, they were victorious during the greatest part of the day. The French wings were turned, the centre division broken, and scarcely 6000 of them stood firm at any one point, when General Dessaix, towards the evening, arrived with a reinforcement of 6000 cavalry. By this time Bonaparte was personally engaged, and on the eve of being killed or taken: but Dessaix, by sacrificing himself with the greater part of his cavalry, broke the Austrian line, and retrieved the fortune of the day; the French army once more rallied, and the Austrians relinquished the field of battle. On the following day Melas proposed to negotiate, and, as the price of an unmolested passage to the interior territory of Austria, agreed to abandon all Piedmont, thus surrendering in an instant twelve of the strongest fortresses in Europe.

On the side of Germany, the French under Moreau exerted equal dexterity. They passed the Rhine with some troops in the neighbourhood of Straßburg, where they were opposed by the Austrians; but this was only a feigned attack. They speedily retreated, and the main body of their army at the same instant descended from the mountains of Switzerland, and crossed the Rhine in the rear of the Austrian army near Schaffhausen. After a desperate engagement, the Austrians were defeated with the loss of 10,000 men, of whom 4000 were made prisoners. As the mode of attack had been unforeseen, and was consequently unprovided for, the loss of magazines and baggage was immense. In another, and harder fought battle, at Wolfkirch, the Austrians lost upwards of 8000 men. Other battles with a similar issue were fought at Biberach, Augsburg, and Hochstett; the result of which was, that the Austrians were under the necessity of crossing the Danube, leaving the French masters of the electorate of Bavaria, and enabled to invest Ulm. A general suspension of hostilities was immediately agreed to, by which both parties retained possession of their present positions. A negotiation for peace was entered into between the French and Austrians, which produced an attempt to negotiate on the part of Great Britain; but as the French demanded a naval armistice, which could have no other tendency than to enable them to accumulate naval stores, the negotiation was dropped. After considerable delays, during which the Austrian minister at Paris concluded a treaty, which his court afterwards disowned, preparations were made for opening the campaign anew. But the French consented to renew the armistice with the Austrians, on receiving delivery of the important fortresses of Ulm, Ingolstadt, and Phillippsburg. These armistices and unsuccessful negotiations were of great service to the French. The consent to a truce in the midst of an unexampled career of victory, gave an appearance of moderation to the new consular government; the conclusion of a treaty at Paris, to which the Austrian government afterwards refused to adhere, induced neutral nations to consider Bonaparte as extremely anxious for the attainment of peace. Hence the wonderful success which attended his arms, during the early part of the campaign, was so far from rousing the jealousy of the other states of Europe, that he was considered as a well-meaning and by no means dangerous neighbour, and that the Austrians had imposed upon his credulity. The northern nations eagerly courted his alliance; the emperor Paul of Russia, led by the natural instability of his temper, and his admiration of military successes, entered into a close alliance with Bonaparte, and seized the British vessels in his ports; while the Danes, Swedes, and Prussians, began to form a confederacy for the purpose of enabling each other to evade the right, claimed in war by maritime states, of preventing their enemy from being supplied with naval stores by means of neutral vessels. The present weakness of the French at sea rendered such a combination directly hostile to Great Britain, and favourable to them.

In the meanwhile, Great Britain was greatly distressed at home by a scarcity of provisions; riots broke out in London and some provincial towns. On this account parliament assembled on the 11th of November, Britain. vember, and the principal discussions which occurred in it related to the severe dearth which prevailed throughout the country, and which involved in very great difficulties the middle and lower classes of society. The members of opposition asserted, that the war and the scarcity were closely connected; whereas Mr Pitt and his colleagues contended, that a more obvious cause might be found in the deficiency of the two preceding crops, in consequence of cold rainy seasons. A royal proclamation was issued in the beginning of December, which exhorted all masters of families to reduce the consumption of bread by at least one-third of the quantity consumed in ordinary times; and in no case to suffer the same to exceed one quarter loaf for each person in each week; to abstain from the use of flour in pastry; and restrict the consumption of oats and other grain by horses. Acts of parliament were at the same time passed, prohibiting the exportation, and offering bounties upon the importation of grain. After all, it was thought by many, that these measures operated doubtfully. By increasing the alarm of scarcity to the highest possible pitch, they induced wealthy persons to buy up grain, and to withhold it from the markets, unless tempted by very exorbitant prices. The prohibition of exportation of provisions was unnecessary, when a better price could be obtained in Britain than anywhere else; and the same high prices afforded a sufficient bounty for importation, though, perhaps, as an exception to this last rule, it was necessary to offer a bounty for grain imported from America, or other distant quarters of the world, to afford the merchant a certainty of profit notwithstanding a change of price before the arrival of his grain.

At the commencement of the succeeding year government imposed an embargo on all Russian, Danish, and Swedish ships in British ports, so that Great Britain was now at war with the greatest part of Europe. Our ally, Austria, ventured indeed to renew the war; but the French general, Moreau, speedily gained a signal victory at Hohenlinden, and drove back the Austrian army upon their capital, while at the same time great defeats were sustained by them in Italy and Franconia. From the necessity of their affairs the Austrians were thus suddenly compelled to sue for peace, which was concluded at Luneville. The Netherlands and the Milanese were resigned. The emperor consented, that France should extend its limits to the Rhine; that Tuscany should be relinquished by the grand duke; but that he should receive an indemnification in Germany: while, on the other hand, the city of Venice and a portion of its ancient territory were relinquished to Austria. The German princes who suffered by the treaty, were to receive an indemnification out of the ecclesiastical states of the empire; thereby weakening still farther the influence of the house of Austria, which had always been the head of the Catholic interest in Germany. This treaty left the French masters of Europe to the southward of the Rhine and of the Adige.

The commencement of the year 1801 was marked in Great Britain by a most important event, the termination of Mr Pitt's administration. When this event was announced to the public, it created no small degree of astonishment in the minds of men. Since Mr Pitt had come into office, a new generation had sprung up, and a succession of the most extraordinary public transactions had occurred, amidst all which, he and his kinsman Lord Grenville, and his friend Mr Dundas, had remained firmly established in power. The authority and influence of these men had in some measure interwoven itself in the opinion of most people, with the very existence of the British constitution. They were surrounded by an immense train of powerful dependents and adherents, raised by their patronage; while, at the same time, Mr Pitt himself retained such a degree of popularity, that his diminution appeared a very bold measure in the present difficult state of public affairs.

The ostensible cause assigned for Mr Pitt's diminution, obtained little credit. He was represented, as having caused promised to the Irish Catholics, a full equalization of Mr Pitt's privileges with those of their fellow subjects, on diminution condition that they should acquiesce in the treaty of union; but that his majesty had been persuaded to oppose the measure, as contrary to his own coronation oath. In this state of affairs, it was said that the ministry could no longer honourably remain in office.

Concerning the true cause of this change, little is publicly known. It does not seem necessary, however, to search for a secret history of such a transaction, as it may be sufficiently accounted for from those principles which, in the constitution of our nature, generally regulate the conduct of men. The influence acquired by Lord North, in consequence of the patronage he enjoyed during the expensive period of the American war, enabled him, by combining with others, to establish a formidable interest in the legislature. But the power enjoyed by Lord North was trifling when compared with that which Mr Pitt and his friends possessed. The war which Mr Pitt had conducted, had been expensive in a degree altogether unexampled in preceding times. The circumstances under which it was commenced had united, as a party under him, almost all the persons of property in the kingdom. During his long administration, also, the crown possessed, in a more direct manner than formerly, the increasing patronage of India. In every respect, therefore, the leading members of this administration must have been regarded, as having attained to a degree of power and influence, which might not easily be shaken; and which, therefore, might prove inconvenient, when held by any combination of subjects in a free country. In such circumstances, it was natural for an experienced prince to wish for a change. Mr Pitt had been originally received into office, as the agent of the crown in the house of commons, and to support the royal prerogative there, against a combination of powerful and accomplished men. He had enjoyed great popularity, and was considered as the man best qualified to conduct the dangerous war of the French revolution. He must have felt the important rank which he held in the public estimation: and it is not improbable, that, as in his dispute with Mr Tierney, he treated the house of commons with little deference, so in the cabinet he may have presumed upon the indispensible importance of his own services; and accounting himself absolutely necessary to the administration of the empire, he may have assumed a considerable degree of independence. Such a sentiment might at least be readily imputed to the minister and his friends; and the result of it would be, that the period when they would no longer be wanted, would begin to be expected with some eagerness. This period occurred as soon as the success of the French arms became such, that it was no longer possible to overturn their new government by war. Accordingly there appears reason to suppose, that, on dismissing this administration, a resolution was at the same time adopted by the British court, seriously and earnestly to endeavour to obtain peace upon any tolerable terms.

With regard to the general merits of this administration, it must be left to remoter times, to form a correct judgment, as we are probably still too much involved in the passions and prejudices occasioned by late occurrences, to be able to appreciate them with sufficient candour and intelligence. Mr Pitt derived great advantage from the copious and splendid eloquence which he at all times displayed in the house of commons; and certainly no man ever possessed so completely the art of managing the people of England, and of retaining their affections in an astonishing degree, while at the same time he continued to possess the confidence of his sovereign. When it is considered that he obtained the government of the British empire when a very young man, the prudence of his conduct, as well as the magnitude of many of his plans, entitle him to a great share of estimation. His sinking fund, though not contrived by himself, was a great and important measure, which he brought forward with ability, and carried into effect with a degree of perseverance, which has undoubtedly rendered it one of the firmest pillars of that great political experiment, the funding system. His commercial treaty with France was a measure recommended by the soundest wisdom. Had it been permitted to continue in force during a few years longer, it would in all probability have connected closely, by the ties of reciprocal interest, the British and French nations, that it would even have prevented the sanguinary contest by which it was dissolved.

The most ambiguous circumstances in Mr Pitt's public conduct, were those which related to parliamentary reform, to the trial of Mr Hatton, and to the slave trade, in which he adopted the popular side in the debates of the house of commons, while the court was considered as hostile to his avowed sentiments; and these sentiments were never successful. Those who admire the dexterous and skilful management of the humours and passions of men, and those who admire disinterested magnanimity of conduct, will perhaps judge differently upon these points. To persons of candour, it may be sufficient to remark, that the passion of ambition was fostered at a very early period of life in the mind of this minister, that it is the most powerful of all human passions, and has been considered as affording an excuse for many efforts towards its gratification.

The most difficult question, with regard to the merits of Mr Pitt's administration, relates undoubtedly to the war with France. Though, by the forms of the British constitution, Mr Pitt was responsible for engaging in this war, and for continuing in it; yet, as he was not actually the head of the state, it is possible that the interference of Britain in it might not originate with him, and that he had only the alternative of engaging in the war, or of relinquishing his power. If the war is to be considered as advised and conducted by him, he will be responsible for the greatest misfortune which during several centuries Europe has encountered, that of the enormous aggrandisement of France, and the subjugation of the weaker states. Had Britain originally stood aloof, or rather, had she negotiated in favour of the independence of France, brought into hazard as it was by the combination of the great military powers; France would have continued to be confined within her ancient boundary. Italy, Switzerland, and Holland, would have retained their independence; and the strength of Austria would have continued unbroken. Or had Britain withdrawn her force with the earliest opportunity, and avoided urging and subsidizing the continental powers till they were successively vanquished, the same result might have occurred.

On the other hand, if the war is to be considered as undertaken to overturn the principles of the French, it was undoubtedly successful to a certain extent, as it compelled them to abandon these principles, and to have recourse to a military usurpation; but it ought to be remembered, that to Britain, as a nation, the political principles of the French were of no importance whatever; whereas, their permanent aggrandisement may bring into hazard our very existence as a people.

Mr Pitt and his friends called forth the resources of the country for the support of the war in an astonishing degree. Immense treasures were lavished away upon it in supporting our allies, and on the increase of our navy. By this last measure, if the French acquired the continent of Europe, Britain might be said to have acquired all the rest of the world, as no communication between distant regions could exist without her permission. It is to be remarked, however, that the acquiescence of the public in the war was preserved, by keeping the minds of men in a state of constant alarm, from the fear of danger to the constitution, in consequence of the alleged disaffection of a body of the people. In this manner, a constant spirit of persecution was maintained throughout the country, which thus seemed to be ruled rather by a jealous faction than by a legitimate government. The concluding great measure of Mr Pitt's administration, the union with Ireland, is entitled to much praise. It was suggested by the course of events, and tended to remedy a great defect in the constitution of the British empire, the want of consolidation into one united political body.

Of the associates of Mr Pitt, his relation Lord Grenville, who acted as minister in the house of lords, was the chief in England, and Mr Dundas in Scotland, and perhaps also in the rest of the empire. This last gentleman possessed the greatest share of power ever intrusted to any Scotman since the union, excepting for a short time to Lord Bute. During a considerable length of time he appears to have conducted almost the whole of the public business of that vast assemblage of nations, in all climates of the globe, which constitutes the British empire. Under his patronage, and that of his friend Mr Pitt, a numerous train of dependents rose to the possession of opulence; while they themselves, engrossed by other pursuits, were understood to have made only a very trifling provision for their future distinction. In doing justice to the merits of these men, the next generation, and even future historians, ought to be upon their guard, not to trust rashly to the unfavourable representations of their actions and intentions, which will be extremely apt to pass down to posterity, in consequence of one part of their conduct. During the last ten years of their administration, they gave great offence to men of letters, at least at a distance from the capital, by their disregard of literary talents in exercising the patronage of the crown, and by placing persons of little reputation or ability in situations in which distinguished learning and liberal accomplishments are expected to be found. It is dangerous to offend those who possess the power of dispensing renown, or of fixing permanent reproach upon a name; and men of letters, an irritable race, are extremely apt to regard their own quarrel as that of mankind. Any errors of the kind alluded to, which were committed by Mr Pitt's administration, in their nomination to offices, may in a great measure be ascribed to the tempestuous spirit of the times, which compelled, or at least induced, administration, to countenance an ardent political zeal, and to consider fidelity to their party as superior to every other endowment. It was only when a man of talents accidentally possessed this merit, that he could expect to meet with any countenance, or that the servants of the crown did not otherwise account themselves at liberty to acknowledge his worth. Mr Pitt and Mr Dundas carried into retirement so much of the public regret, that considerable sums of money were contributed to erect statues to their memory.

At the time when the change of ministry was made, the king became affected with a feverish illness, supposed to result from the anxiety and agitation of mind which accompanied that important measure. In making choice of a new prime minister, he avoided admitting into power the party that had opposed the war; and selected Mr Addington, whom we have mentioned as originally patronized by Mr Pitt, and who, in the station of speaker of the house of commons, had gained the approbation of all parties by his good temper, prudence, industry, and conciliating manners. This gentleman appears to have obtained from his predecessors in office a promise of support in parliament; and he was industriously represented throughout the country as nothing more than a nominal minister, holding a temporal situation, which, with the first opportunity, he was to relinquish in favour of Mr Pitt and his friends. This account of the state of affairs derived plausibility from the actual support in the parliamentary debates which the new minister received from these gentlemen, and from the influence which they evidently retained in the nomination of all inferior offices. Mr Addington's appointment as first lord of the treasury and chancellor of the exchequer, was followed by the nomination of Lord Eldon to the office of lord high chancellor, Lord St Vincent to that of first lord of the admiralty, Lord Hawkebury as secretary of state for the foreign—Lord Pelham for the home department, and Colonel Yorke as secretary at war. Lord Eldon was succeeded by Sir Michael Pepper Arden, who was created Lord Alvanley, as chief justice of the common pleas; and Mr Addington by Sir John Mitford, as speaker of the house of commons. Sir William Grant was made master of the rolls, and Mr Law and Mr Percival attorney and solicitor general.

On the 2d of February, the parliament of Great Britain and Ireland was opened; but, as the king's parliament, illnes immediately succeeded that event, the new administration could not receive formal possession of their offices till the month of March, and during that time the old ministers continued to hold their former rank. At the opening of the imperial parliament, as it was now called, the speech from the throne expressed his majesty's great satisfaction in being now able to avail himself of the advice of the united parliament of Great Britain and Ireland. This memorable era, distinguished by a measure calculated to consolidate the strength of the empire, he hoped would be equally marked by that energy and firmness which our present situation so peculiarly required. The court of Petersburg had treated our representations of the outrages committed against our ships and property, and against Englishmen, with the utmost disrespect; indeed acts of injustice and violence had aggravated the first aggressions.

Under these circumstances, a convention had been concluded between Petersburg, Copenhagen, and Stockholm, the avowed object of which was to renew their former engagements, for establishing a new code of maritime law, inconsistent with the rights, and hostile to the interests of this country.

The earliest measures had been taken to repel this confederacy, and to support those principles essential to the maintenance of our naval strength; in which firm determination there was no doubt of the vigorous assistance of the united parliament.

The speech concluded with recommending an inquiry into the high price of provisions, and promises of terminating the present contest whenever it could be done consistently with security and honour.

When the usual address was moved, some debate occurred in both houses, with regard to the present state of affairs, more particularly as connected with the combination of the northern powers against Britain. In the house of commons, Mr Grey deplored the prospect of a war with all Europe. Russia, he said, had evidently been guilty of the grossest violence and injustice towards this country, in the confiscation of the property of our merchants, and the treatment of our sailors; but the emperor excused the British government of violating a convention by which he was to receive the island of Malta, as the reward of his co-operation against France; and the truth of this assertion ought to be investigated. Concerning the northern confederacy, Mr Grey remarked, that the principles on which it was founded were of no recent origin. The king of Prussia, in 1740, disputed the pretensions of this country, and contended strenuously for the principle, that free vessels make free goods. In 1762, the Dutch resisted the claim of a right to search ships under convoy. In the year 1780, the assertion of the rights of neutral states assumed a greater degree of consistency and concert; the subscribers, that is all the powers of Europe entered into the armed confederacy, officially announced its principles, and claimed the rights enumerated in that celebrated document, as agreeable to the law of nations. Hence, Mr Grey contended, that to avoid encountering the inveterate animosity Britain. mostly of other states, the subject ought to be cautiously investigated; and, unless it appeared absolutely necessary to our safety, Britain ought from prudence to relinquish her claim. In his opinion, France, while without seam or skill, would derive little benefit from the importation of naval stores in neutral vessels.

Mr Pitt, who still acted as chancellor of the exchequer, asserted, that with every one of the three northern powers, independent of the law of nations, we had on our side the strict letter of engagements, by which they were bound to us. In the convention signed between Great Britain and Russia, the latter bound herself to use her efforts to prevent neutral powers from protecting the commerce of France on the seas, or in the ports of France. Denmark and Sweden had expressed their readiness to agree on that very point, which they were now disposed to contend. We did not indeed know the precise terms of their new convention; but as its existence and general object were acknowledged, we must necessarily act upon the supposition of their hostility. Mr Pitt asked the question now to be, Ought we to permit the navy of our enemy to be supplied and recruited; to suffer blockaded forts to be furnished with warlike stores and provisions; and permit neutral nations, by hoisting a flag on a fishing boat, to convey the treasures of America to the harbours of Spain, and the naval stores of the Baltic to Brest and Toulon? If the commerce of France had not been destroyed, if the fraudulent system of neutrals had not been prevented, her navy would have been now in a very different situation.

In the month of March, a debate occurred in the house of commons, which is worthy of notice on account of the recapitulation which it produced of some important circumstances connected with the state of the nation, and the history of the war. Mr Grey moved for an inquiry into the state of the nation. He said, that we were now in the ninth year of a war with France, and threatened with a war against all the maritime states of Europe, if not actually involved in it; we had added £270,000,000. to the capital of our national debt, and above £17,000,000. to our annual taxes; we found ourselves opposed to France, which was now extended in territory beyond the hopes of her most sanguine friends, increased in population, and supported by all the states of the north. We were opposed to her with diminished means, exhausted strength, and stript of every ally. Was it not then incumbent on the representatives of the people, to enter into a serious inquiry into the means most likely to restore to us security and happiness. Mr Grey represented the conquests we had made during the war, as not compensating our disasters, or the acquisitions made by France. Her frontier now reached to the Rhine, to the Alps, and to the ocean. All these possessions we had consented to abandon as the price of peace; for peace, which our ministers might have made with France confined within her ancient limits, while our own country was prosperous and happy. Thus all our losses were irretrievable, and our triumphs empty. It had been said with truth, that there was no shore, from the Texel to the Adriatic, which had not witnessed the defeat of our forces, and the disgrace of our arms. The unfortunate attempt upon Dunkirk, the shameful retreat through Holland, the evacuation of Toulon, the abandonment of Corsica, and the expedition to Quiberon, all were fatal proofs of ill-concerted schemes. Mr Grey adverted to the late expedition against Holland as more disgraceful than the rest, because it terminated in a capitulation to an inferior force. He asserted, that administration had acted with such imprudence, that our whole allies were converted into enemies. The Swedes and other neutral nations had complained, that their trade was molested, their ships detained, and justice refused them in our courts, or so long delayed that it was useless. These he considered as points which undoubtedly deserved investigation; nor did the internal state of the country itself require consideration. The sum already mentioned of £270,000,000. had been added to the national debt, exclusive of imperial and other loans, and the reduction by the sinking fund; and yet we were assured by the ex-ministers that they left the country in a flourishing condition. And did not every Englishman, from diminished comfort, or from positive distress, feel this declaration to be an insult? Ask the ruined manufacturers of Yorkshire, Manchester, and Birmingham; ask the starving inhabitants of London and Westminster. In some parts of Yorkshire, formerly the most opulent, the poor rates had increased from £22l. to £600l. a-year, though the whole rent of the parish did not exceed £600l. In Birmingham there were near 11,000 who received parochial relief, where the number of inhabitants is 80,000, and this of a town accounted one of the most flourishing in England. The situation of the sister kingdom was alarming in the extreme. Since the recall of Earl Fitzwilliam, Ireland had been the scene of transactions shocking to humanity. Was it now tranquil? A few days ago a bill passed the house, which, we were told, was necessary for its safety; though rebellion had been crushed in the field, it was said to lurk in secrecy; the mass of population was disaffected; and nothing prevented the separation of Ireland from us but the inability of France to send a force to assist the rebels. Whatever any one might assert, he could not persuade himself, that there was any innate depravity in the Irish nation. He must believe, that, if they were well governed, they would be sober, industrious, and orderly. Hence Mr Grey called for an inquiry into the present state of affairs, and demanded the support of the new administration, as a testimony of their disapprobation of the measures of their predecessors.

Mr Dundas defended the management of the war. The principle which he laid down, as one which never ought to be departed from, was that war ought to be directed to the destruction of the commerce and colonial possessions of the enemy; in this he included their maritime power, which must entirely depend upon their commerce. But this was not the only reason: it was hardly possible for England to be long at war with France, without being involved in disputes on the continent, which might deprive us of many of the markets which we had for our goods, and therefore it was peculiarly our interest to gain these colonies, that they might remain open for our commodities. In order then to judge how far this war, conducted on this principle, had been disastrous and disgraceful, graceful, he would state its progress and success. Hostilities commenced against France, in February 1793; in that year Tobago, St Pierre, Miquelon, Pondicherry, part of St Domingo, and the fleet at Toulon, were taken, besides the possessions of the Newfoundland fishery. In the year 1794, we took Martinique, Guadeloupe, St Lucia, the Saints, Corsica, and Martinique; in 1795, Trincomalee, and the Cape of Good Hope; in 1796, Amboyne, Berbice, and Demerara; in 1797, Trinidad, with four ships of the line either taken or destroyed; in 1798, Minorca; in 1799, Surinam; in 1800, Goree, Malta, and Curaçao. Such had been our successes. Mr Dundas defended the expedition against Holland, upon the same principles as formerly; observing that an expedition could not be regarded as completely unsuccessful, which terminated in the capture of ten sail of the line, and 13 frigates, which would otherwise have been now employed in augmenting the force of the northern confederacy.

Concerning the navy, Mr Dundas stated, that without enumerating its triumphs, he would briefly mention, that since the commencement of the present war, we had taken or destroyed 80 sail of the line belonging to the enemy, 181 frigates, 224 smaller ships of war, 743 French privateers, 15 Dutch, and 76 Spanish ships. The losses we had sustained were, three sail of the line, one of which we had retaken; one 50 gun ship, which also we got again; and of the frigates captured by the enemy, only the Ambuscade remained in their possession. One of the great advantages to be derived from the colonial possessions of the enemy, was the procuring markets for our manufactures. In the year 1793, the manufactures sent from this country to the West Indies, amounted to above 1,800,000l. sterling. Before the war, our exports to the East Indies did not exceed one million, and in the last year exceeded 1,600,000l. a proof that we had not lost the markets of Europe, and that his principle had been found policy, to destroy the commerce of the enemy, and direct all our forces to this end, excepting such a part of them as might be necessary for the defence of Great Britain and Ireland; and when 400,000 men were applied to this purpose, which is actually the case, he left it to the house to judge, whether ministers had paid sufficient attention to the security of the country.

Mr Dundas remarked, that the failure of an expedition was now considered as a decisive proof of misconduct in ministers; but in that glorious seven years war, which was in every body's recollection, there were expeditions attempted which completely failed, though the failure was not considered as a proof of incapacity or neglect in Lord Chatham. The conquests which we then made, were Senegal, Louisburg, St Lucia, Dequeane, Guadeloupe, Martinique, the Havannah, Montreal, Pondicherry, Grenada, Belleisle, besides destroying the fortifications of Cherbourg; we took or destroyed 32 sail of the line, and 58 frigates, besides a proportionable number of smaller vessels. We were now in possession of every place taken in that war, excepting Guadeloupe, the Havannah, and Belleisle; but on the other hand we had gained the Cape of Good Hope, Ceylon, Demerara, Berbice, and all the Dutch possessions in the East and West Indies; added to Minorca and Malta. We had also destroyed the confederacy formed against us in the East Indies, and acquired a great increase of power and territory there.

Lord Temple expressed concern at being obliged, by a sense of duty, to differ from those with whom he had uniformly acted since he had entered into parliament. He professed the greatest respect for the new chancellor of the exchequer; but he acknowledged, he much wished this gentleman had still continued to fill the chair of the house, which he had done so long with honour to himself and to his country. But he felt it incumbent on him, to support the present motion, because he conceived us to be in a state of difficulty and danger. To such an object, it was worthy the character of the house, to devote the most serious attention; and it was called upon in justice to investigate it. The king, in the exercise of his undoubted prerogative, had appointed a new administration, to direct the affairs of the country, in this important juncture; he meant not to speak harshly of it, though it appeared a thing made up of threads and patches, of men unknown and inexperienced, in whom he could place no confidence, because he had had no trial; who, whatever might be their talents, whatever their capacity for governing a great nation, had not hitherto been in circumstances to evince them: and this was not a moment to make experiments. But to return to the motion; that suspicion was a sufficient ground for inquiry, he conceived to be an excellent principle for a British house of commons to act upon.

Mr Pitt, after expressing his respect for the new administration, observed, that no point had been more disputed than that of confidence in ministers. By some people it was held, that no person was entitled to it, till he had given proofs of having merited it. Here it never could be carried in subservience to the letter; for whoever entered into any employment, must at first be new to it; there could be no experience without trial, but when persons had been tried in one situation, and had acquitted themselves well in it, it was a rule to give them credit when they entered into another, till proof of their incapacity or misconduct appeared. The present ministers were called, indeed, to a new situation, but they were not new to the house and to the public, or to the love and esteem of both.

Mr Pitt then bestowed the most ample praises on the merits of Mr Addington, Lord Hawkesbury, and Earl St Vincent. He asked the gentlemen of the opposition, if they knew any one among themselves superior to Lord Hawkesbury, excepting one (Mr Fox) whose transcendent talents made him an exception to almost any rule, but whose conduct also ought to be an exception, having withdrawn his attendance from the house, and whose counsels, had they been followed, must have been injurious to the country. Of the other individuals composing the new administration, much might be said, but he was unwilling to trespass on their patience. He would only add, therefore, upon this subject, that it showed little reflection or consideration, to affirm that the present ministers were unentitled to confidence, by which he meant, of course, no more than a constitutional confidence; and the house was bound by the best principles of sound policy, to wait wait to see the conduct of the servants of the crown, before they withheld it.

Upon the subject of the retirement or dismission of the late administration, Mr Pitt contended, that his majesty had a right to part with his servants, and his servants to retire, without any explanations to the public. Concerning the affairs of the Irish Catholics, and their connexion with the dismission of administration, which had given rise to many reports, he said, that a memorandum had been sent, in the name of a noble lord, at the head of the executive government of Ireland, who thought it essential to communicate the grounds of our change of administration, to persons more immediately amongst the Catholics. Mr Pitt said, it had been at his express desire this communication had been made, and the motives explained to them which led to the change, to prevent any misrepresentation of that subject. Emancipation of the Catholics was a term he disclaimed. He never understood the situation of the Catholics was such as to need what deserved to be called emancipation; but he thought the few benefits which they had not yet anticipated, might easily have been added to those so bountifully conferred on them in the present reign; not as a matter of right, but of liberality and political expediency, and, in this sense, of wisdom. Had such measures preceded the union, indeed, they would have been rash and destructive; and even now, if any attempt was made to push it so as to endanger the public tranquillity, or to pervert the affections of any of his majesty's subjects, the late ministers would be firm in resisting them. But he hoped the day would come when such a measure might be revived, and carried in the only way he wished to see it carried, which was conformably to the general tranquillity of the empire. He acknowledged, that it had appeared to him of such importance, that being unable to bring it forward as a measure of government, he did not conceive it possible for him, with honour, to remain in the same situation; and, at the same time, he wished it to be understood, that whenever the same obstacles did not exist, he would do every thing in his power to promote its success. He denied, however, that any of those who had retired from office, had so pledged themselves to the Catholics, as to be under the necessity of resigning their offices, because they could not perform their promise; and said, he was authorized to deny, that ever the Catholics supposed they had received such a pledge. An expostulation was natural, but a pledge was never given.

Mr Pitt concluded, that the British government had justice on its side, or rather was supported by the law of nations, in the claims which it now maintained, to search neutral vessels for military stores on their way to the enemy, and to declare particular French or other ports under blockade, to the effect of thereafter having a right to arrest neutral vessels attempting to enter them.

Mr Fox said, that it was undoubtedly a doctrine recognized by the law of nations, that free bottoms did not make free goods; but doubted the propriety of discussing it at this critical juncture. He thought our claims, upon this subject, were extended too far, when they were made to reach to naval stores, as these had not been at former periods considered as contraband. He considered the subject as resolving into three branches: convoys, search, and contraband goods. If one state was to convey the trade of another, it was a new doctrine, and a fit subject for representation, by which it might have been settled. As to search, if we were not content with the papers, and had ground of suspicion, we should search and do the same with a convoy, in which we were fully justified. Suppose Spain, which was always at war with the Algerines, should demand the search of every British vessel passing through the strait, merely under pretext of her being at war with Algiers, would we submit to it? Surely not; and yet we had demanded it of others. Respecting contraband goods, it was curious to talk of ships, and timber and naval stores, not being foreseen as implements of war in 1694. Great maritime powers were then in existence; and it was idle to compare them with the articles of gunpowder, guns, and cannons. Naval stores were not in the number of modern inventions; and if it had been thought proper to have called them contraband of war, they would have been enumerated.

Mr Fox adverted to the successes of the war, which had been enumerated by Mr Dundas. To the navy he gave much praise; and also to the late first lord of the admiralty, assigning his merit as the reason for the constant and brilliant triumphs of the navy; whilst our military expeditions, though our troops were as brave as our seamen, had generally failed. In naval tactics almost everything depended on the talents of the officers; whereas, in military movements, much depended on the original design. The boasted capture of islands was not the object of the war: our object was to protect Europe against France. How had we succeeded? Which of the two nations had been most aggrandised in the course of it? We are told, that only £60,000,000 was added to the debt; so £50,000,000 is cut off, besides that for which the income tax is mortgaged; and a debt to be paid by installments was to be considered as no debt at all. It now cost us £8,000,000 a-year in taxes, £10,000,000 for poor rates; and the whole land-rent of the country was but £25,000,000. A country paying double its land rent was in a state demanding inquiry. The war secretary had talked much about the diversion of war, and shown us its nature on his principles. He had sent his royal highnesses, and an army of 30,000 men, to the only neck of land perhaps in the world, where a fifth part of their own numbers was equal to cope with them. Of the armistice of Hohenlinden, and the negociation which followed it, Mr Fox spoke with indignation, reprobating the conduct of the minister, which had so fatally proved that eloquence was distinct from wisdom. Time had now evinced, that all the great objects of the war were defeated, and our allies had deserted: and when no prospect of success remained, we might resort to negociation. The same men who had rejected the proposals of Bonaparte with insolence, must approach with respect, suing for favour, to avoid participating in the disgrace.

With regard to the Irish Catholics, Mr Fox said, that, in his opinion, no man ought to be deprived of his rights, because he worshipped God according to the dictates... Britain dictates of his own conscience; that it was a reflection upon parliament to say, as Mr Pitt had said, that he could not there propose a measure which he approved. Mr Fox declared his belief, that no such difficulty existed; but that the late minister might wish to retire for a season, till overtures of peace were made, which he could not make, without mortification, to the man he had insulted. Mr Fox spoke of the change of administration as a fortunate occurrence. Some indeed might suspect, from the panegyric of Mr Pitt, that the new ministers were the less gaudy puppets, directed by those who had quitted their stations; and if they adopted the system of their predecessors, with the additional blame of being hostile to the Catholic claims, acting in this point from their own motives, they would be unworthy of confidence.

The new chancellor of the exchequer, Mr Addington, said, that the degree of confidence which the house of commons ought to extend to the present ministers, it was not for him to conjecture; they only asked for that portion of it which should be constitutionally reposed in persons duly appointed by his majesty, unless it was precluded by antecedent character and conduct. Of himself he should say no more, than that he should be grieved at its being supposed, that he had been induced, by ambition or interest, to exchange the situation he had filled for 12 years, for the present, in which, in obedience to the king's command, he was placed. A sense of duty and allegiance alone had directed his conduct; and to this he had sacrificed every other consideration. He commented on all the leading points in dispute between us and the northern powers; and after ably stating the grounds of the principle asserted by this country, and referring to the exception made by existing treaties, gave it as his decided opinion, that the right for which we contended was vital and fundamental, and could neither be abandoned nor compromised; and, at the same time, expressing an earnest wish, that it should be asserted temperately and firmly. The naval pre-eminence which it was the object of the present confederacy to subvert, had protected the commerce of Europe, during the present war, from piracy. Respecting Catholic emancipation, he deprecated whatever might have the appearance of intolerance and prescription. No restraint ought to be imposed on any who differed from the established church, but what was absolutely necessary for its security and permanence; and he anxiously hoped, that the dissenters of all descriptions would feel assured, that they were regarded in no other light by government, than as truly valuable members of the community.

He felt it incumbent on him, lastly, to declare, that it was the determination of his majesty's servants, to take such steps, as appeared to them best calculated for the restoration of peace; that no form of government in France would obstruct negotiation; and if there was a corresponding disposition on the part of the enemy, the grand object would be accomplished. He concluded, with professing, that he occupied no party ground, and wished no confidence that was not constitutional. The motion for inquiry was rejected, by a majority of 291 against 195.

Notwithstanding the change of ministry, Mr Pitt brought forward the business of the supplies in the house of commons. Their amount was £3,567,462l.; of which sum, £1,800,000l. was for the navy; £1,902,000l. for the army; and for the ordnance £1,938,000l. The income tax was now stated as amounting only to £6,000,000l. As some deficiencies of former estimates required now to be provided for, Mr Pitt stated, that the whole charge of the two countries, for the service of the year, would amount to £42,197,000l., which would be divided between the two countries thus: Great Britain for its fifteen-seventeenth of the joint expense, and those charges which belonged separately to her, would have to defray, in round numbers, £37,872,000l.; and the charges falling upon Ireland, would be £4,324,000l. The sum of £25,000,000l. was raised by way of loan, and new taxes were imposed upon paper, tea, houses, lead, the post-office, and various other articles. The income tax was also farther mortgaged; so that the debt, for which it was pledged, amounted to £76,000,000l.

As the progress of the funding system of Great Britain will in all probability be regarded, in future times, as a most important fact in the political history of nations, it may be here remarked, that the extent of the national debt was so great, and it arose out of such a variety of transactions and engagements, that British statesmen had begun to differ among themselves about its actual amount. Mr Tierney had of late presented to the house of commons, annually, a statement of the debt and of the expenditure for the current year. His statements of the amount of the debt had been combated by the minister. We shall here insert an abstract of a considerable number of resolutions, which he moved upon the subject, on the 7th of June; together with counter resolutions moved by Mr Addington, on the 22d of the same month.

Mr Tierney stated, that the total amount of the public funded debt, including the Irish and imperial loans, and deducting the stock purchased by the commissioners, and £16,083,802l. transferred to them on account of the land tax redeemed, was, in February 1801,

| Debt remaining, exclusive of the stock redeemed for the land tax, | £490,009,846 |

On the contrary, the resolutions which were moved by Mr Addington and carried, stated, that the total amount of the public debt, after deducting the sum of £52,281,656l. redeemed, and the annuities fallen in to the commissioners, and £16,083,802l. transferred to them on account of the land tax redeemed, was, on the 1st of February 1801, together with short annuities to the amount of £545,333l. and long annuities to the amount of of £1,007,613l. after deducting the annuities provided for by Ireland,

That the life and short annuities were £45,333l. per annum, worth

That the long annuities were £1,007,613l. per annum, worth at 5 per cent.

Whole debt was £426,107,866

Both Mr Addington and Mr Tierney concurred in estimating the total sum to be raised in Great Britain in the year 1801, at £68,923,970l.; and they calculated the amount of a future peace establishment, exclusive of sums to be paid on winding up the expenses of the war, at £28,979,563l.

In the meantime, to prevent the active cooperation of Denmark with the designs of Russia, an armament was fitted out in the British ports, consisting of 17 sail of the line, three frigates, and about 20 bomb ketches, gun brigs, &c., under the command of Sir Hyde Parker, and Lord Nelson. This fleet sailed from Yarmouth on the 12th of March, and triumphantly passing the Sound, which was deemed impossible, reached the capital of Denmark. The approaches to Copenhagen were fortified with skill; batteries of cannon and mortars were erected on every part of the shore, where they were likely to be efficacious; the Crown islands, and that of Amak, were strengthened by a variety of works; the mouth of the harbour was protected by a chain, and by a fort built on piles; and a line of shipping added to the strength of the place. The admiral having ordered an attack from the southward, Lord Nelson advanced with 12 sail of the line, four frigates, some sloops, fireships, and bomb vessels; but, from the intricacy of the navigation, two of the largest ships ran aground, and another was obliged to cast anchor far from her intended station. Captain Murray in the Edgar, led the van with great intrepidity. The Monarch sustained the most destructive fire, and her commander (Moss) lost his life with above 50 of his men. Captain Riou was also killed while he was attacking the ships at the entrance of the harbour. The battle raged for four hours with great slaughter on both sides. The number of killed on the part of the English, exceeded 250; on the side of the Danes above 500. Almost 700 men in the ships of the aggressors, and about 1500 of the opposite party, were wounded. Some of our ships were severely damaged, while 17 Danish vessels, floating batteries included, were sunk, burnt, or captured.

After the victory had been decided, Lord Nelson threatened to burn all the floating batteries which he had taken, without saving the troops who were on board, if the enemy should continue the least firing. This menace produced a cessation of hostilities. Lord Nelson landed, and conferred with the prince of Denmark; and a convention was signed for a regular armistice.

On the 19th of April the British fleet appeared off the entrance of Carlskrona, and the admiral acquainted the governor, that the court of Denmark having concluded an armistice by which the unfortunate dispute with the court of St James's had been accommodated, he was directed to require an explicit answer from his Swedish majesty, relative to his intention of adhering to, or abandoning the hostile measures he had taken in conjunction with Russia. An official answer to this demand was communicated from the king of Sweden to Sir Hyde Parker, intimating, that his Swedish majesty would not fail to fulfil the engagements entered into with his allies; but that he would not refuse to listen to equitable proposals made by deputies, furnished with proper authority to regulate the matters in dispute.

The termination of the contest is, however, not to be attributed, either to the battle of Copenhagen, or to the victorious progress of the British fleet, but to an event which had just before taken place, to the astonishment of Europe, and which produced an almost instantaneous revolution in the politics of the north. On Death of the 23rd of March, the emperor Paul, who had performed so versatile and extraordinary a part on the political stage, from the period when he ascended the Russian throne, expired suddenly. His capricious tyranny, which was at last about to be directed against the members of his own family, proved fatal to him. His son and successor, Alexander, immediately disclaimed the hostility against Great Britain, and made reparation for the damage suffered by our merchants, in consequence of the embargo imposed upon our vessels. A Convention convention was adjusted with Russia in the month of June, which put an end to the dispute with the northern states, as Sweden and Denmark could not of themselves hope to resist the power of Great Britain. By the third article of the agreement, it was stipulated, that effects embarked in neutral vessels should be free, with the exception of contraband stores of war, and the property of an enemy; that the latter designation should not include merchandise of the produce, growth, or manufacture of the countries at war, acquired by the subjects of the neutral state, and transported on their account; that the commodities prohibited should be such only as were declared contraband by the treaty of commerce concluded between Great Britain and Russia in 1797; that a port should be considered as under blockade, when the ships of a belligerent power should be stationed, as to render it evidently dangerous to enter; that the neutral vessels should not be stopped, except upon strong grounds, and that the proceeding should be uniform, prompt, and legal. The next article provided, that the right of searching mercantile ships, falling under convoy of a ship of war, should only be exercised by the ships of the government, not by those of private adventurers. Thus the chief points in dispute were settled in our favour.

The war between France and Great Britain was now in Europe reduced to operations merely maritime, engagement and these were of the most trifling nature. One of the most important of these, was that which occurred up on the coast of Spain, between Sir James Saumarez and a squadron of French and Spanish ships of war. On the morning of the 6th of July, the British admiral stood through the straits of Gibraltar, with the intention of attacking three French line of battle ships and a frigate, which were at anchor off Algeciras. On opening Cabrita Point, he found the ships lay at a considerable distance from the enemy's batteries, and having a leading wind up to them, he conceived he had every reasonable hope of success. He had previously directed Captain Hood in the Venerable to lead the squadron; but, though it was not intended, the captain Britain found himself under the necessity of casting anchor from the wind failing. Captain Stirling in the Pompee, at the same time, anchored opposite to the inner ships of the enemy, and the action commenced. In the ardour for engaging, the Hannibal unfortunately ran aground. Every effort was made by the admiral to cover her from the enemy; but being only three cables length from one of the batteries on shore, he was obliged to retire, and to leave her in their hands. The loss on board the English squadron was 375. The admiral was scarcely in harbour before he was apprised, that the French line of battle ships disabled in the action of the 6th, were on the 8th reinforced by a squadron of five Spanish ships of the line, under the command of Don Juan de Mozen, and a French ship of 74 guns. He learned further, that they were all under sail on the morning of the 12th of July, together with his majesty's late ship Hannibal.

"I had almost despaired (says Admiral Saumarez) of having a sufficient force in readiness to oppose such numbers." But by great exertion he was able to warp out of the Mole with all the ships under his command, the Pompee excepted, which had not time to get in her sails. The object of the British admiral, was to obstruct the passage of this powerful force to Cadiz.

Late in the evening, he observed the enemies ships to have cleared Cabrita Point, and at eight he bore up to stand after them. At eleven the Superb was up with them, and opened her fire on the enemies ships at not more than three cables length. At this critical period a fatal mistake of the enemy decided the battle. The Spanish ships, in the darkness and confusion, fired upon each other; the Real Carlos took fire and blew up, and the Hermenegildo, still mistaking her for an enemy, ran on board her, and shared her melancholy fate. The San Antonio of 74 guns and 730 men, commanded by Le Rey chief of division, being thus left unsupported, struck to the Superb. The remaining ships of the enemy now crowded all the sail they could carry, and stood out of the straits. At daybreak, only one French ship appeared in sight, which was standing to the shoals of Cavil. At this juncture the wind failed her, and the Venerable was able to bring her to action, and had nearly silenced her, when the loss of the mainmast, obliged the captain of the Venerable to desist, and this ship, which was an 84, escaped along with the rest.

As the French now resumed their usual threat of invasion, and assumed the appearance of collecting a force in the harbour of Boulogne, an attempt was made by Lord Nelson to obstruct their preparations. He succeeded in doing some damage, which appears to have encouraged him to make a more serious effort. Boats intended for boarding the French vessels, were sent off in the night in four divisions, under the respective conduct of the captains Somerville, Parker, Cotgrave, and Jones; and some boats furnished with howitzers, were detached under Captain Cowan, to join in the enterprise. Parker's division first approached the enemy, and commenced a fierce attack. He made strenuous efforts, with undaunted courage, and with sanguine hopes of success; but an unforeseen obstacle baffled all his exertions. This was a very strong netting traced up to the lower yards of the French vessels, which were also fastened by chains to the ground, and to each other. So effectual was the resistance of the foe, thus guarded, that about two thirds of the crew of the boat in which he acted, were repelled in their attempts to board a large brig, by a furious discharge of cannon and musketry. Many of the assailants lost their lives, many were wounded and maimed. The captain received a shot which carried off his leg and part of his thigh, and his boat would have been seized by the enemy, had not a cutter feebly towed her off. Somerville in the mean time silenced the fire of a brig near the pier head; but far from being able to bring her off, he found difficulty in securing the retreat of his own boats. Cotgrave after a spirited attack, was deprived of the services of many of his men by a fire from the flotilla and the shore. Jones felt so strongly the obstructions of the tide, that he could not approach before the break of day, when the other captains were returning; he, therefore, retired without making any hostile attempts. Captain Parker died of his wounds after the return of the fleet to the Downs. The number of British seamen killed and wounded, amounted to 172.

In consequence of the unfortunate refusal of the late Egyptian administration to ratify the treaty called the capitulation of El Arifh, negotiated with General Kleber by Sir Sidney Smith, the French still retained possession of Egypt. To remedy the error, a considerable force had been dispatched from Great Britain, under the conduct of an experienced and gallant officer, Sir Ralph Abercromby. The British forces under Lord Keith and General Abercromby, after unexpected delays on the coast of Asia Minor, arrived off Alexandria on the 1st of March. The following day the fleet made sail for the bay of Aboukir, and anchored there. Till the 8th, the sea ran high, and no disembarkation could be effected; but on that day, the first division made good their landing at ten o'clock in the morning, in the face of a body of French, who were evidently aware of their intention, and were posted in force, with considerable advantage of position. The front of the disembarkation was narrow, and a hill which commanded the whole, appeared almost inaccessible: yet the British troops ascended the hill, under the fire of grape shot, with the most perfect intrepidity, and forced the French to retire, leaving behind them seven pieces of artillery, and a number of horses. The disembarkation was continued during that and the following day. The troops which landed on the 8th advanced three miles the same day; and on the 12th, the whole army moved forward, and came within sight of the French, who were formed advantageously on a ridge, with their left to the canal of Alexandria, and their right towards the sea.

It was determined to commence the attack on the 13th, and, with this view, the British army marched in two lines by the left, with an intention of turning the right flank of the enemy. The attack was in some measure anticipated by the French, and they defended from the heights on which they were formed, and attacked the leading brigades of both lines. The British troops were therefore compelled to change their position, which was done with the greatest precision, and the rest of the army immediately followed their example. After a severe conflict, victory declared in favour of the English, though not without considerable loss. The French commander in chief in Egypt, Menou, appears to have acted upon this occasion with little judgment. Instead of bringing down nearly his whole force to the coast, which would have enabled him greatly to outnumber, and consequently, in all probability, to defeat the invaders, who were less acquainted with the country than his own officers; he thought fit to hazard an engagement, on the 21st of March, with only half his force. It commenced before day light in the morning, by a false attack on the left of the English under Major-General Craddock, in which the French were repulsed. But the most vigorous efforts of the enemy were directed to the right of the English army, which they endeavoured, by every possible means, to turn. The attack on that point was begun with great impetuosity by the French infantry, sustained by a strong body of cavalry, who charged in column. The contest was unusually obstinate. The French were twice repulsed, and their cavalry were repeatedly mixed with the English infantry, but at length gave way altogether. While this was passing on the right, the French attempted to penetrate the centre of the British army with a column of infantry, who were also repulsed and obliged to retreat. A corps of light troops, however, was advanced, supported by infantry and cavalry, to keep in check the left of the English, which was certainly the weakest of the whole line; but all their efforts were fruitless, and the British remained masters of the field. The loss on our side was great, being in killed, wounded, and missing, upwards of 1500. The loss of the French was calculated in the English accounts at 3000. One of the French generals, Roiz, was killed, and generals Lanusse and Bodet died of their wounds. A French regiment, which had been styled invincible, was destroyed in this battle, and their colours fell into the hands of a Scottish regiment, the 42d. This battle decided the fate of Egypt. The invaders having the command of the sea, received reinforcements, so that they speedily became decidedly superior to the remaining French force. In this battle, however, the British army was justly considered as having suffered a great calamity in the loss of its general. This officer was at once beloved and esteemed by the soldiers whom he commanded; he preserved the most strict military discipline, while, at the same time, he secured the attachment of his troops by his obvious anxiety for their welfare. Early in the late war, he was employed on the continent. He commanded the advanced guard in the action on the heights of Cateau, and conducted the march of the guards from Deventer to Oldenzaal in the retreat of the British troops in 1794. In the following years, till 1797, he was engaged as commander in chief in most of the successful enterprises of the British in the West Indies. On his return to Europe, he was invested with the rank of lieutenant-general, and appointed to the command of the forces in Ireland. In this station he made great efforts at once to protect the people, and restore discipline to the army, both of which the violence of faction had induced the rulers of that country to neglect. Though he was a man of modest manners, yet, being of a most independent character, he did not hesitate to express, in public orders, the indignation which he felt on observing the disorder and consequent misery which had been introduced into Ireland, by encouraging the licentious insolence of the troops against persons accounted disaffected to the government. He freely informed the army in that country, that they "were become formidable to every one but the enemy." In the expedition to Holland, he displayed great military talents, which excited the admiration at once of his own army and of the hostile generals.

After the death of Sir Ralph Abercromby, the command devolved upon General Hutchinson. He lost no time in proceeding towards Alexandria, where the principal force of the enemy was yet concentrated. In the meantime, the town and castle of Rosetta were taken by a division of the British army under Colonel Spencer, aided by a body of Turks. The French garrison, amounting to 800 men, made but a feeble resistance, and retired to the right bank of the Nile, leaving a few men killed and prisoners.

While such was the state of affairs in the neighbourhood of Alexandria, Admiral Blanket, with a considerable force from the East Indies, effected a landing at Suez. The admiral was separated from the rest of his squadron in the dangerous and difficult passage of the Red sea; but before the end of April was joined by a large reinforcement under the command of General Baird, colonels Wellesley, Murray, &c.

As the capture of Grand Cairo, next to Alexandria, was an important object with the allies, a force was detached early in May for its reduction. On the 9th of the month General Hutchinson, with 4000 British and an equal number of Turks, attacked the French near Rhamanieh; the French were driven in, and in the night retreated towards Cairo, leaving a small garrison at Rhamanieh, which on the following day surrendered to the victors. The loss of the English on this occasion did not exceed 30 men. About the same time a body of French and Copts, who had moved forward from Cairo to attack the Turks, were defeated by the grand vizier, who was essentially assisted by Colonel Murray, and other British officers. The French are said to have lost 50 men and the Turks about 30 in this action. The whole number of French, &c., engaged was said to amount to 4600, and the Turkish army to 9000.

It was the middle of June before the British army under General Hutchinson reached the vicinity of Cairo. He found the works very much extended, though the garrison did not exceed 4000 or 5000 in number. The captain pacha at the same time invested Gizeh (which may be regarded as a suburb of Cairo) on the left bank of the Nile, and the grand vizier took a position within cannon-shot of the city. Thus Grand invested on every side, the garrison, on the 22d, sent a flag of truce to the English general, offering to treat for the evacuation of Cairo upon certain conditions. After a negotiation of several days, the surrender was finally agreed upon in a convention of 21 articles; the substance of which was, that the French army at Cairo and its dependencies should be conveyed in ships of the allied powers, and at their expense, together with their baggage, arms, ammunition, and other effects, to the nearest French ports in the Mediterranean; and of this convention General Menou was to be at liberty to avail himself.

The port of Alexandria was all that now remained in possession of the French; it was attacked by sea and land, and at length surrendered by capitulation on the 2d of September. At the time when the news of this event reached England, the views of men were turned to a new state of things. Administration had seriously entered into negotiations for peace. These were conducted by Lord Hawkesbury on the part of Great Britain, and M. Otto, who resided at London as agent for the French prisoners of war, and who was now intrusted, on the part of the French, with this important business. The whole was managed with such secrecy, that not even the persons who were in official situations, except those immediately concerned, were acquainted with the state of the negotiation; and the lord-mayor of London was the first person out of the cabinet to whom the result was communicated. Thus no unfair advantage could be taken; and this treaty stands almost singular on our records, since, at a period when the practice of gambling in the public funds was from the wide extension of public credit more predominant than at any previous crisis, not a single instance occurred of any sinister practice.

By the preliminary articles, which were signed at London on the 13th of October, by M. Otto on the part of the French republic, and Lord Hawkesbury on the part of his Britannic majesty, Great Britain agreed to the restoration of all her conquests, the island of Trinidad and the Dutch possessions of Ceylon excepted. The Cape of Good Hope was to remain a free port to all the contracting parties, who were to enjoy the same advantages. The island of Malta was to be evacuated by the British troops, and restored to the order of St John of Jerusalem. Egypt was restored to the Ottoman Porte. The territory of Portugal was to be maintained in its integrity; and the French troops were to evacuate the territory of Rome and Naples. The republic of the Seven Islands was recognized by France. The fishery at Newfoundland was established on its former footing; and, finally, plenipotentiaries were to be named by the contracting parties, to repair to Amiens, to proceed with the formation of a definitive treaty, in concert with the allies of the contracting parties.

During the war negotiations for peace had so repeatedly proved unsuccessful, that a general incredulity had come to prevail with regard to the possibility of such an event; accordingly all merchants conducted their speculations upon the supposition, that there existed no probability of an immediate termination to the war. The state of the present negotiation had been so carefully concealed, that, when the official intelligence of its issue was transmitted throughout the country, it everywhere excited the utmost astonishment. It produced, however, almost instantaneously, the most unbounded expressions of joy among all orders of persons. The zealous adherents, indeed, of the late administration were upon the whole rather disaffected; but their voice was overwhelmed in the general acclamations which took place, and which far surpassed the expressions of joy which had occurred at the termination of any former war. As an abundant harvest was reaped at the same time, the prospect of plenty greatly added to the public joy.

Parliament assembled on the 29th of October. By this time the new administration had obtained, by the mildness of their conduct, and by their successful negotiations for peace, a powerful hold over the affections of the public. When they first came into office, they appeared to have obtained a promise of support from their predecessors; but as might naturally have been expected, this kind of gratuitous support could not be very consistent or uniform. Mr Pitt himself continued to give countenance to the minister; but others of his friends avowed their dissatisfaction on account of the treaty with France.

The speech from the throne announced the favourable conclusion of the negotiations begun in the last session of parliament. It expressed much satisfaction, that the differences with the northern powers had been adjusted by a convention with the emperor of Russia, to which the kings of Denmark and Sweden had made known their readiness to accede.

That the preliminaries of peace had been ratified between us and the French republic; and while this arrangement manifested the justice and moderation of our views, it would also be found conducive to the interests of this country and the honour of the British character. As the provision for defraying the expenses which must unavoidably be continued for some time, and maintaining an adequate peace establishment, could not be made without large additional supplies, all possible attention should be paid to such economical arrangements as might be consistent with the great object of security to his majesty's dominions.

The speech concluded with applauding the naval and military operations of the last campaign, and the glorious issue of our expedition to Egypt; and with a fervent prayer that the people might experience the reward they so well merited in a full enjoyment of the blessings of peace; and above all, in the undisturbed possession of their religion, their liberties, and laws.

In the house of lords, the motion for the usual address passed unanimously. In the house of commons, both Mr Fox and Mr Pitt declared, that they joined in the general joy which the peace had produced, and gave it their approbation. On the other hand, Mr Windham had the misfortune, he said, to differ on the subject of the general joy and exultation; he did not approve of the preliminaries of peace signed with France; nor could he approve the address, if it implied approbation of them; but as he did not consider the support of the one as inseparably connected with the other, he should not withhold his vote.

It behoved him to give his reasons for dissenting so materially in a material point. To stand as a solitary mourner in the midst of public rejoicings, to wear a countenance clouded with sadness, whilst all others were lighted up with pleasure, appeared ungracious. But were the circumstances of this peace such as justified our exultations on former occasions? To him they appeared in a quite contrary view; and when he was desired to illuminate, he should first endeavour to learn whether it was to light him to a feast or a sepulchre. It was his firm persuasion, that in signing this peace his honourable friends had put their signatures to the death-warrant of the country. He knew the inconsistency of human affairs, nor was he profane enough to set bounds to the dispensations of providence; but neither could he foresee what changes might be wrought. wrought in the disposition of the people of England by intrigues from without or convulsions from within; but upon no rational view could he see his way out of the evils it would entail upon this country.

The only thing which was necessary to enable France to divide with us the empire of the seas was a participation of our commerce. This she would effectually secure by the present peace; while, by the surrender of our conquests, we had thrown out of our hands the only means to prevent it, the extension of our colonial system.

The motives which induced ministers to conclude these preliminaries, Mr Windham said, he knew not; some of them he had heard, but was not convinced; on the contrary, they appeared wholly insufficient. If we were forced to accept this peace through inability of resorting to alternatives, their conduct was the more excusable; and we had to thank them, not for what they had acquired, but saved for their country. If they can prove, that, by ceding foreign colonies, they had preferred objects nearer and dearer to us, as Portsmouth, Plymouth, and Ireland, and the soil of England, from ravage and desolation, they were entitled to gratitude instead of censure; and had established, not an apology, but a claim to thanks. Such a plea, however, he did not recognize; and how far they were actuated by necessity, would be a matter for future discussion.

Mr Addington said, that the observations of Mr Windham were premature, as the articles of the treaty were not before the house. Without referring to the terms of the peace (for that he could not do at this time without transgressing order) he would aver, that all we had given up would have afforded us no sort of security against the dangers apprehended by Mr Windham. The best counterpoise to the power of France was in the preservation of our constitution, in our industry and skill, in the right direction of our resources, (and happily much remained of these resources) which he considered, under providence, as the security of the blessings of peace.

Respecting the hint thrown out, that some unknown necessity might have been the cause of ministers having advised his majesty to sign the preliminaries, he totally disclaimed the plea; he did not seek his own justification, nor would any of his colleagues seek it, in such a way. If the enemy had not acceded to the terms agreed upon, we should have continued the contest, and been able to have carried it on, proving to the world, that we still had resources to maintain the honour and secure the liberties of the British empire.

Mr Sheridan said, that notwithstanding the unanimity with which the address was consented to, he believed, that if men sincerely delivered their opinions, there never was a period of less real unanimity. Mr Pitt had spoken of the peace in terms to which he could not agree, calling it glorious and honourable; still more did he dissent from those who maintained it was inexpedient to make peace at all. It was a peace of which every Englishman might be glad, but no one proud; it was a peace involving a degradation of national dignity, such as the war might lead us to expect, the worst in which this country had ever been engaged; and the peace perhaps as good as any minister could make in the circumstances in which we were placed.

In consequence of a message from his majesty, communicating the preliminary treaty with the French republic, an address of thanks was moved on the 3rd of November. Earl Spencer expressed regret, in manifesting a difference of sentiment from the ministers, of the house of lords, all of whom he entertained a very favourable opinion, and with some of whom it was his pride to have coincided in principles, and co-operated in conduct. The great object of Britain, in former wars with France, was the preservation of the balance of power, that the relative strength of France should not exceed that of other countries, and thereby endanger our security. This was the point which had been considered, from King William's confederacy against Louis XIV. to the present age. To ensure this balance, it was not only necessary that Britain should not be left by the peace in a worse political situation than in the beginning of the war, but that her strength, possessions, or acquisitions, should continue in proportion as high as those of France. In the present war, the acquisitions of France had been infinitely beyond all former conception; she had, by her arts or her arms, subdued the Netherlands, Holland, the left bank of the Rhine, and a great part of Italy; her power, compared with that of Great Britain, exceeded what she had been allowed to retain at any former treaty of pacification; nor could we be secure, when such immense acquisitions had been left to France, without any thing like an equivalent left to this country. This general principle his lordship illustrated at some length, and strongly condemned the conditions of the peace now concluded. It was a peace of very great inequality, whether we viewed the relative state of France and the continent, or of France and England. It was also a peace with a republic which was still under the influence of a revolutionary government, with a usurper who could make a rupture whenever his spleen or caprice prompted a violation of the contract, and consequently a peace which could never be considered permanent. France, overgrown and gigantic, would easily be roused to a new war, whenever the first consul could gratify his inordinate ambition. In such a contest there would be great inequality, and thence would arise danger to this country, which, notwithstanding the valour of our arms by sea and land, would have a powerful and terrible enemy to combat.

Lord Pelham took a retrospect of the several negotiations, especially those in which the ex-ministers had been concerned. He said there was very little difference between the present peace, and that under the consideration of the late ministry. He stated the nature and progress of the negociation after Lord Malmsbury went to France; and insisted that this was as proper a time to conclude it as any. Although nothing was mentioned in the preliminaries of the prince of Orange, he hoped something might be obtained for him by the noble marquis intrusted with the definitive treaty. The terms of peace were the best that could be procured, even in favour of our allies, such as scarcely could have been expected, as already stated in the preliminaries. Portugal was safe, whatever might be forfeited. territories had been released from the French yoke. One of the greatest triumphs of the war was the expulsion of the French from Egypt, by which our Ottoman ally had been saved, and the British name raised to the pinnacle of glory. With regard to Malta, of which surrender so many complaints had been made, it was his lordship's opinion, that its retention would have been more injurious than beneficial to England. A powerful garrison would have been requisite for its protection, which would have distracted our fleets and armies, without any object equal to the vigilance and activity of our men. In the East and West Indies, we had been triumphant by sea and land; our possessions in the east, so valuable to this country, had received very important additions, by the conquests we had made there. As to the security of the peace, we surely had every security which could be expected in this critical juncture of affairs. Besides, it was the policy and interest of France to preserve it, and in this view he believed it would be preserved, and consequently voted in favour of the motion.

Lord Grenville contended, that, as Britain was in a prosperous state, we ought to have obtained more honourable terms of peace, because we were in a condition to demand them. He said, it was far from his intention to undervalue the acquisitions of France; on the contrary, he thought them more important than was generally esteemed: she had made the Rhine the boundary of her empire, she had acquired Savoy, &c., and not only extended her territories beyond the ambition of her monarchs, but she had her frontiers protected by dependent republics and tributary kings. On our side, we had triumphs no less brilliant and striking; we had multiplied our colonies, and our navy failed invincible. We had rescued Egypt, captured Malta, possessed ourselves of Minorca, and shut up the Mediterranean from the ships of France and Spain. The Cape of Good Hope was ours, if not the only, at least an important key of the east. In the East Indies, we had everything except Batavia, which we might also have possessed, had we thought it worth the cost of an expedition. In the West Indies, we had Martinico, Trinidad, &c. Upon the continent of South America, we had an absolute empire, in extent almost equal to that power to which we restored it. He meant Surinam, Demerara, &c. Such were the colonial possessions acquired by the war. It, indeed, was not undertaken for the purpose of colonial conquests; yet the force of the country had wisely been directed to that object: for whenever we were at war with France, it was essential to cripple her marine, which could never be better done, than by contracting her commerce, and depriving her of her colonial possessions; and these should have been held as pledges of indemnity, and still more as pledges of security. If Europe could not have been restored to her pristine state, these ought to have been retained as a counterpoise to the power of France.

Lord Grenville denied the fairness of comparing the present treaty with that proposed at Lille. We now gave up Surinam, Malta, and Minorca. At no time, during the contest, was the spirit of the country so depressed, as the negociation at Lille. If it were asked, why did we choose such a period to negociate? the answer was, it was not chosen; but ministers were convinced, that the war could not be carried on, unless the people of England clearly found, that the rulers of France, at that time, would not grant us peace on any terms of moderation. A variety of causes combined to produce that despondency; the stoppage of the bank, the defection of our allies, and, above all, the mutiny in the fleet. If such were our situation, the measure was defensible on necessity; but this was not the case at present. Under all the disadvantages under which the negociation at Lille was undertaken, we demanded on that occasion the Cape of Good Hope, and Pondicherry and Cochin in the East Indies. The result was, in his opinion, that we had given to the French the only thing they wanted, the means of creating a navy, and of rivalling us in our commerce; while we had obtained nothing in return.

The earl of Moira said, that though the terms of the treaty were inadequate, they were unavoidable. The noble lord who condemned them, ought to recollect, that he had left the country in jeopardy, with a slender chance of recovery, and it was impossible afterwards to conclude an advantageous peace.—Lord Nelson made some remarks respecting Malta. He said, that when he was sent down the Mediterranean, this island was in the hands of the French; and on his return from Aboukir, it was his first object to blockade, because he deemed it an invaluable service to rescue it out of their possession. In any other view, it was of no consequence, being at too great a distance from Toulon to watch the French fleet from that port; and in time of peace, it would have required a garrison of 7000 men, in war as many more, without being of any real utility to us. The Cape would be equally detrimental if retained by us; and though it certainly ought not to be given up to them, this cession would be better than to keep it. Though the war had been long, he believed his majesty seized the first opportunity of making peace, and he believed it would prove the best that existing circumstances admitted. The address was carried by a great majority.

When the same subject was discussed in the house of commons, Lord Hawkebury ascribed the origin of the preliminaries to the interference of France in the affairs of neutrals in other nations; but said, that the state of that country the house of commons was now considerably amended, and that it was impossible to look at the present state of France, without being convinced, that we had at least effected this change. View the manners and opinions of their people in 1793 and 1801! After this comparison he would not hesitate to give his opinion respecting the moral evils of the peace, and that they certainly were less at this moment than at any former period. With regard to the continuance of hostilities, there were two considerations by which we were to be regulated; the first was, Did we possess the power of forming another coalition against France? and the second, If we continued the war, what injury could France do to us, or we to France? The first coalition had failed, the second had equally failed. What encouragement had we to hope that the third would be more fortunate, and to hazard so dangerous an experiment? It was impossible, he contended, to find in Europe the elements of such a combination of force, directed to the attainment of one grand end; and if no coalition could be formed, what object could we possibly have in the farther prosecution of hostilities? As to any injury which France could do to us, or we to France, it did not require much argument to prove there was none. Where, and in what manner, was it possible for us, with our immense superiority by sea, to effect a fatal blow; or for the republic to invade an island, not only defended by its navy, but fortified by the hearts of the people? The fact was, neither power could affect the other; and to continue hostilities, would be a barbarous effusion of blood, for no end but slaughter. His lordship then expatiated on the advantages we had gained, and the good faith we had maintained with our allies, releasing them from express stipulations when they were exposed to danger by continuing faithful to their engagements. To Portugal every protection had been given, confident with our strength and her interests. Naples was required to exclude our shipping from her ports. She went farther, and joined in an alliance, which would have justified a declaration of war on our part; when, with a magnanimity peculiar to the spirit of Britain, we interfered in her favour; obtained the restoration of her dominions, and the re-establishment of her independence. To the Ottoman Porte, who of all our allies remained faithful to the last, we evinced proofs of inviolable attachment and gratitude; for we procured for her not only the restitution of her territories, but the renunciation of France to acquisitions which threatened her existence. To the stadtholder and the king of Sardinia, to whom we were not bound by obligation, every thing had been performed which this country was able to perform. An arrangement concerning the former had been carried on at Berlin; and though from various reasons it had been withdrawn, the stadtholder was satisfied with our measures. But it had been contended, that we had given up, by treaty, an island of great importance to our foreign concerns and commercial prosperity, Minorca, which he did not consider as an acquisition worth retaining. In war, we had always acquired that island whenever we pleased, and always lost it at the conclusion of peace to avoid the expense. Of Malta, he spoke with less confidence, which, from its impregnable state, was certainly of political consequence in the Mediterranean: but Malta was no source of trade and opulence; and, connected with the prosperity of the Levant, its consequence was considerably diminished. The Levant trade might, like many other topics of commercial speculation, be highly valued; but as far as it related to England, was next to nothing. The whole of our manufactures, exported thither during the war, had not exceeded the sum of £12,000l.; and this was to be taken out of the aggregate exports of £4 millions. The trade of Great Britain was inconsiderable, compared with that of other countries, to the Levant. It was chiefly supplied by the south of Europe, and must remain with these places, from the nature of its articles and the facility of its intercourse. Respecting the north of Europe, it had principally been in the possession of the Dutch. Here it might be asked, why the Dutch, who had no settlement in the Mediterranean, had succeeded in cultivating this branch of commerce? Because their policy was wiser than ours. We prevented ships, with forged bills of health, from entering our ports; made all vessels, failing from the Mediterranean, perform quarantine; and prohibited the landing both of sound and bad goods. The Dutch, on the contrary, gave them an airing within their ports, separated the good from the bad merchandise, and allowed the immediate importation of the former. Thus they occupied almost the whole of the northern trade to the Levant, which was so strongly felt by us, that two years ago, it was deemed expedient to repeal those laws, to encourage a system of trade, which the Dutch converted wholly to their own profit, without possessing a port in the Levant.

Lord Hawkesbury added, that of Trinidad and Ceylon he could not say too much, when he called them the two great naval stations of the parts of the world to which they belonged. Ceylon contained ports so capacious and secure, that the whole of the navy and commerce of Great Britain might ride with ease and safety in them. It held out a position to which our Indian army might retire, if necessary, and defy the attempts of the united force of the world. Trinidad was also of considerable naval importance, and so healthy and productive, as to induce us to select it in preference to every other possession in that quarter. Thus, considering the results of the war, if the term glory be not taken into account, we have at least made an honourable peace; we had been engaged in a tremendous contest, and come out of it, considering the circumstances, with advantage. The situation of Europe and of Great Britain might appear critical; but, in a sound system of policy, consisting of firmness and moderation, would be found a counterpoise for every danger, and a remedy for every evil.

Earl Temple considered those who had signed the peace, as having signed the ruin of their country. Amongst other ill consequences, he lamented the encouragement hereby given to republican principles; and one of its effects was to revive the hopes of the disaffected. He recapitulated the various offensive objects of the war, not one of which had been accomplished. The only adequate plea for such a peace, was dire necessity.—Mr Pitt said, that, upon a subject of such importance, it was his misfortune to differ from those with whom it had been his happiness to live in habits of strictest friendship.

He remarked, that it was undoubtedly the duty of government, in negotiations, to obtain the best possible terms; but it was difficult to know how far insisting on some lesser points might endanger the whole treaty; and, for his own part, he had no hesitation in declaring, that he would rather close with an enemy on any terms, not inconsistent with the honour of his country, than continue a war for any particular possession. When he had the honour of a seat in his majesty's councils, if it had come to a question of terms, and if the pacific disposition of the enemy had corresponded with ours, he knew that he himself should have acted on that principle; and knowing this, it was but candid to apply it to another administration. He did not pretend to state, that this peace fully answered all his wishes; but the government had obtained the best terms they could, and the terms for which we contended would not have justified ministers for contracting the war.

Our grand object was to give additional vigour to our maritime strength, and security to our colonial possessions. In thus considering the subject, it was necessary to look to the leading quarters of the world in which we were to seek this security. Our acquisitions were all in the Mediterranean, in the East and in the West Indies; and if, on examination of this treaty, it should appear, that in two out of the three quarters mentioned, viz. in the East and West Indies, we had retained such possessions as effectually preserved our ancient territories, we had done much. He meant not to undervalue the conquests in the Mediterranean, especially Malta; but certainly it was of secondary consideration, when compared with the Indies. The Levant trade he accounted unimportant, in comparison with the trade with Ireland, America, and the tropical regions. He accounted it found policy to place Malta under the protection of a third power, to avoid attracting the jealousy of France. Mr Pitt declared, that he regarded the Cape of Good Hope as far inferior to Ceylon, which, of all places upon the face of the globe, would add most security to our East India possessions; as Trinidad was of the greatest importance in the West, being a post from which we might direct our future operations against Spain in South America. When it came to be a question of terms between England and France, it was necessary for us to retain one of the greatest naval stations in the West Indies, because our chief want in that quarter was a naval post. The four were, Guadeloupe, Martinique, St Lucia, and Trinidad; and of those Trinidad and Martinique were the best, and Trinidad the better of the two.

Mr Pitt justified our conduct towards our allies, who themselves had forsaken us, or requested to be relieved from their engagements towards us. Even were we to take upon ourselves the granting a remuneration to the prince of Orange, Mr Pitt thought it ought not to stand in the way of a great national arrangement. But it had been affirmed, that we had signed the death-warrant of our country in this peace, and given to France an augmentation of maritime strength, whilst we had gained nothing to balance her power. Now, in the first place, if we had retained all our conquests, it would not have made any difference to us in point of security: not that he meant to imply that he would not have kept them all if he could: but they were not important, except, as they would give us a little more or less of colonial strength, and only tended to promote our security, by increasing our finance. The acquisition of all these islands would not have enabled us to counterbalance the power of France on the continent; they would only have added a little more wealth, which would have been ill purchased by a little more war.

Mr Pitt said, that our resources were greater than the French, or even the English themselves, fully understood: but they ought not to be lavished away; as, by a continuance of the war, we might come to sit down in a worse relative situation than at present. He said, that the former administration had wished to see the restoration of the French monarchy, but did not insist upon that point. If it became impossible to attain this, policy required that we should remain satisfied with the next best.

Mr Fox declared himself satisfied with the terms of the treaty, and asserted, that no perseverance in the war would have enabled us to make peace upon better conditions. There were persons, he said, who lamented the peace as glorious for France. If it were so, and not inglorious to England, it gave him no concern. The opinions of men depended in a great degree upon their conceptions of the causes of the war; if one of its objects was the restoration of the accurled despotism of France, to him it was another recommendation of the peace, that it had been obtained without the accomplishment of such an object. If the coalition to restore the Bourbons had succeeded, the consequences would have been, amongst all the kings of Europe, a perpetual guarantee against all people who might be opposed by any of them, in any part of the world. All countries therefore must be benefited by the failure of such a project, but no one more so than Great Britain. Had the coalition in the reign of Charles I. established such a guarantee, would the liberties of the people have been preserved against the house of Stuart? Had such a guarantee existed in latter times, would the revolution of 1688 have been able to maintain itself?

In the terms and tone of the present treaty, he perfectly coincided. He approved the terms, and thought the noble secretary had wisely tempered firmness of conduct with moderation of tone; but further than this he could not go: he would by no means agree reflecting the time in which the treaty was made, it came many, many years too late.

He said, he would put it to the house, whether at the time the opposition was most railed against, for advising pacific measures, we could not have made peace on terms equally advantageous with the present. Would not France, on the breaking out of the war, have acceded to any? Would she not then have relinquished Holland, and perhaps abandoned her designs on the Netherlands? But since that eventful period could we not have negotiated better very often, for instance, after the surrender of Valenciennes? Again, at Lille, when we only failed from the extravagant pretensions of administration? In January 1802, the chief consul made a direct overture, and we returned answer, that the most effectual mode of facilitating peace would be to restore the Bourbons, not indeed as the only means, but it was left to the French to suggest any other: Did we hint then at the possession of Ceylon or Trinidad? Would not Bonaparte have added these? Yes, and the Cape into the bargain. We then might have had Egypt by the convention of El Arith. The gallant Abercromby, indeed, would not have fallen covered with laurels in the lap of victory, nor would our brave army have acquired immortal honour; but we should have gained Egypt without the loss of blood or treasure. The chief consul might not perhaps have relinquished the Netherlands, or the left bank of the Rhine; but in Italy he had only the Genoese territory, and we had nothing then to refer to the south-eastward of the Alps, and our allies were victorious to the frontiers of France. At that time, the instability of the government operated with us; but neither its stability nor instability were of any real consequence. None of the convulsions and changes of the French revolution produced any material difference in her relation with foreign powers. She had at the beginning made peace with Prussia, and sedulously preferred it during the stormy times succeeding its ratification. We were told by the ministers to pause, and we did pause from January 1800 to October 1801, and added 73 millions to our national debt, since we returned that impertinent answer to the overtures of Bonaparte. This pause cost five times as much as all the duke of Marlborough's campaigns.

To negotiate the definitive treaty of peace, the marquis Cornwallis went to Paris towards the close of the year, and from thence to Amiens, where the negotiations went on very slowly, and were not concluded till the 27th of March 1802. The chief difficulty occurred with regard to Malta. It was at last agreed that it should be restored to the knights of the order of St John, under the protection and sovereignty of the king of Naples; and that it should be under the guarantee of France, England, Russia, Spain, Austria, and Prussia; that if the order should not have sufficient troops to defend the island, the guaranteeing powers should each contribute an equal portion of troops, the officers to be appointed by the grand master. It was settled that Malta should be a neutral port, that one half of the garrison should be Maltese, and that there should be no French or English body of knights, or tongue as it is called. The king of Naples, however, was to be invited to garrison the island with 2000 men for one year, from the restitution of the knights; which was to take place in three months after the exchange of the ratifications of the treaty. In other respects, the definitive treaty differed little from the preliminaries formerly agreed to.

During the dependence of the negotiation, the French first consul, Bonaparte, had taken some steps which indicated little moderation, or rather an arbitrary presumptuousness of character, which demonstrated that it would be extremely difficult to remain upon terms of amity with him, and that the desire of extensive dominion, which at present governed his council, was of too restless a character to allow much hope of tranquillity to the world. Without waiting till a definitive treaty of peace should be concluded, he sent an immense army to St Domingo, which obliged Britain to send to the West Indies a powerful fleet to watch its motions. On the continent his measures were much more arbitrary. A considerable portion of Lombardy, with Milan as its capital, had been erected into what was called the Italian republic, containing some millions of people. This was now united to France, by the form of nominating Bonaparte to the supreme office of president over it. This last measure would at any other period have involved all Europe in war; but at present no state ventured to interpose; and the British ministers finding no power in Europe disposed to resist this step towards the permanent aggrandisement of France, and being themselves truly anxious, as it would seem, to restore peace, did not interrupt the negotiations on this account.

On Thursday the 29th of April, Lord Pelham by his majesty's command, laid before the house of lords, a copy of the definitive treaty of peace between his Britannic majesty and the French republic, his Catholic majesty, and the Batavian republic, signed at Amiens on the 27th of March. Several debates occurred in that house upon the subject; and, at length, on the 15th of May, Lord Grenville moved the order of the Debates on day, for the house to take into consideration the definitive treaty. He remarked, that it might be asked of what use was discussion, now that peace was concluded? was it to abrogate, could it correct the treaty? To this question he was the first to answer that this unfortunate treaty had been ratified by his majesty, and was therefore irrevocable; to its terms, however injurious, we were bound to accede. By evasion we should but add to disfigure disgrace, and, with the loss of national honour, fill up the measure of national calamity. He wished not to impede the execution of the treaty, but to demonstrate to that house its dangerous tendency; to ascertain the situation in which it left the country; to point out the perils which impended, and the safety which yet remained. His objections to the preliminary treaty he had already stated; but to the definitive treaty there were objections yet more formidable. His lordship observed, that the two bases of negotiation, the status ante bellum, which signified the actual situation of the parties previous to hostilities, and the uti possidetis, which referred to their position during the pacification, had both been applied in the most prejudicial manner to this country. With regard to herself, England had adopted the status ante bellum; with regard to her rival, the uti possidetis. England had ceded her own conquests, and confirmed to France her new acquisitions. France possessed dominion on the continent; we had to oppose that dominion, the colonies of France and Spain. It would have been just that France should purchase our colonial by her continental sacrifices. His lordship contrasted the definitive treaty with that of 1763. It had, he said, been an invariable principle with Lord Chatham, to make the preliminary as much as possible the definitive treaty. Our negotiators had treated with France during a naval armistice. Immediately subsequent to the preliminary treaty, France had sent an armament to the West Indies, and obliged England to detine for the West Indies also, a naval force more than double to any squadrons which had been sent during the war. The necessity of keeping in the West Indies 35 sail of the line was the first fruits of the peace. His lordship contended, that it was incumbent on our negotiators to have inflicted that the French fleet should not fail till the preliminary articles were definitively ratified, and till the first consul had afforded proof that he meditated not the accession of power he had since made in Italy. It was obvious, that the definitive treaty contained concessions more important than the preliminary articles; and it was palpably the object of the French government to exclude the commerce of this country from the continent of Europe. With respect to the situation in which Portugal and the prince of Orange were left by the treaty, the house had been told that it was a pity, and that the articles were read with regret. The proposed indemnity to the prince of Orange was evidently at the option of France; for the Cape of Good Hope, no effort had been made to ensure its independence; and Malta, whose independence had been expressly expressly stipulated, with the provision that it should be guaranteed by one of the powers of Europe, competent to its protection, was finally placed under the guarantee of six powers who never could be brought to agree on the subject of it. Its restoration to the order was nominal and futile. He had estimated the whole Maltese revenue at 34,000l. of which, however, 8000l. only came to the knights; he was now competent to state that the expenditure of Malta amounted, on the average of ten years, to 130,000l. per annum. The dominions in France and Spain had been confiscated; the langues of Italy had produced about 20,000l. or 25,000l. from their property in Piedmont, which was also confiscated; the langues of Naples and Portugal, with a revenue of 20,000l. remained to support the establishment of 130,000l. The order of Malta was virtually extinct; it would be subject to the nomination, the influence, and the dominion of France. His lordship objected to the treaty, that certain pecuniary claims, which Britain had for supporting the French prisoners during the war, had been relinquished. He contended that, by the circumstance of this treaty not containing a clause as usual renewing former treaties, and in particular by the non-renewal of the treaty of Utrecht, this country had ceded its claims of equal participation with France in the privileges of commerce in Spanish America. In like manner, we had confirmed the cession of Goree and Senegal, without renewing the clause which stipulated for us the liberty of carrying on the gum trade; whilst France had manifested her hostility to our commerce, by prohibiting the right of trading on that part of the coast of Africa. His lordship proceeded to take a retrospective view of the situation of this country at the commencement of the negotiation. With a colonial territory of an immense extent, we had, in the very conquests achieved by our arms, the means of perpetuating our victories. From the West Indies, the produce of which amounted to two millions annually, a considerable revenue had arisen, which was now lost. By our naval superiority, we had controled the movement of the French fleet; they were now at liberty to steer for the West Indies, and we were under the necessity of sending fleets to watch them. We were in possession of resources adequate to the prosecution of the war, and held in our hands the means of extorting a just and reasonable peace. Instead of improving these advantages, we had resigned to the French the preponderance of power on the continent, established her sway in Italy, and annexed to her important possessions in India. Even our right of sovereignty in India was no longer recognized. It had been suggested that this right was guaranteed by the silence of the definitive treaty; a mode of argument which appeared equally strange and singular. His lordship affirmed, that the sovereignty of the Cape was necessary to the safety of our territories in India. He intimated the war with Tippoo Sultan, when a corvette had been sent to the Cape, from whence fresh troops were immediately dispatched, who landed, marched, and co-operated at the siege of Seringapatam. By ceding the Cape to Holland, we had ceded it to France. The town and port of Cochin had also been surrendered to Holland, and virtually to France. In the West Indies we had restored to France Martinique and Tobago, and facilitated the recovery of St Domingo. France was also mistress of Louisiana, and in reality of Florida, which could not from its vicinity to Louisiana remain subject to Spain. France possessed the key of Mexico, which she might enter at any period. If we returned to the Mediterranean, his lordship said, it would be impossible to send there a single ship, without the permission of France. We were ship-rigged of Majorca, Minorca, and even of the island of Elba; we were excluded from Leghorn, and deprived of the means of maintaining a fleet in that sea. The king of Sardinia could no longer open to us his ports. His lordship observed, that the victory obtained by Lord Nelson at Aboukir was to be attributed to the assistance rendered by the king of Naples. In return for these services, the British government had stipulated that the French republic should evacuate his dominions, without stipulating that they should not return to them. His lordship added, that whatever the value of the British navy had won, the incapacity of a British ministry had lost. He would ask whether the advantages of such a peace preponderated over the disadvantages of the war? It had diminished our commerce, and rendered it absolutely necessary, for the sake of safety, to maintain a great naval and military force in constant discipline.

The duke of Norfolk expressed his hope, that now the sword was restored to its scabbard, it would not again be unheathed for the acquisition of a station in the Mediterranean. Lord Auckland, in reply to Lord Grenville, discussed a point of some importance in the law of nations. He stated, that, from an attentive perusal of the works of the publicists, he had corrected, in his own mind, an error still prevalent; that all treaties between nations are annulled by war, and, to be reinforced, must be specially renewed on the return of peace. It was true, that treaties, in the nature of compacts and concessions, the enjoyment of which has been interrupted by the war, are thereby rendered null; but compacts which were not impeded by the course and effect of hostilities, such as the rights of a fishery on the coasts of either of the belligerent powers, the stipulated right of cutting logwood in a particular district; compacts of this nature were certainly not affected by war. There were also circumstances which might authorize the dissolution of treaties, without any rupture between the two parties. In the late revolution in Holland, the antecedent treaties subsisting between us would have been dissolved, although no hostilities had ensued, by her incapacity to maintain the relations to which those treaties were meant to apply. It had therefore been well observed by Vattel and other writers, that treaties cease whenever an essential alteration in either of the contracting parties takes place. He applied this doctrine to Savoy, Switzerland, and other countries, the temporary victims of the French revolution. His lordship admitted, that the definitive treaty contained not a single provision, direct or indirect, for the renewal of treaties, which had subsisted previous to the war; but it was not true, that by the non-renewal of our treaties with Holland, the vessels of that republic would be exonerated from the ancient practice of striking their flag to British ships of war in the British seas; that practice had existed independent of the treaty of 1782, or even of the treaty of Breda in 1767, which were only recognitions of a pre-admitted claim. The same remark was applicable to the fifth article of the treaty of 1764, by which the States-general promised not to obstruct the navigation of British subjects in the eastern seas. That article was no new grant, but an acknowledgment of a right, and a notification to merchants that they would not be disturbed in the exercise of that right. With respect to France, his lordship acknowledged, that the commercial treaty of 1786 had expired, but not till it had reached the natural era of decay; nor should he feel solicitude for its resuscitation, unless our negotiator at Amiens could have proved, that the French manufacturers were able, in 1802, to resume the competition to which they were unequal in 1786, under the existing tariff; unless we also would have sacrificed the additional wine duties, which produced above a million sterling. He had the deepest conviction of the importance of commercial treaties; and he appealed to the recollection of the manufacturers of Birmingham, Staffordshire, Lincolnshire, Yorkshire, and Paisley, who, during six years, had experienced the benefits of the commercial treaties. His lordship was ready to admit, that the great and venerable mass of treaties, which had long constituted the title-deeds of nations, was utterly gone; but this event was independent of omission in the definitive articles; it was caused by the fate of war and the tide of revolutions, which had swept away the old order of things in Europe. He thought the French plenipotentiaries right in objecting to the renewal of treaties, irreconcilable with the present state of Europe. With regard to our sovereignty in India, it had been confirmed and extended by various treaties, recognized by all the powers of Europe and India, who had accepted privileges from us; and finally established by the undisturbed possession of 40 years: that France was bound by the law of nations, in India and elsewhere, and by that law was pledged to resume the situation she had maintained previous to the war.

On the contrary, Lord Carnarvon represented the treaty as pregnant with danger to the country. With the highest respect for the virtues of those who composed the present administration, his lordship confessed, that he had never confided in their talents or experience. The moment they had taken the helm, they had pressed into their service a noble lord, beloved indeed, but ill fitted for the invidious task of coping with men old in craft, adept in duplicity, regardless of principle, and unpractised in virtue. Under negotiators so unequal, some disadvantages were inevitable; yet the preliminary articles, which disappointed even the least sanguine, and which were approved by none, were welcomed by all. It had been hoped, that some articles relative to our allies, and involving our own national honour, would be altered: but the definitive treaty, instead of realizing, had annihilated these hopes; concession was heaped on concession, disgrace added to disgrace. By omitting to renew former treaties, ministers had unadjusted all former adjusted disputes, and without the customary acknowledgment of our rights, had left us to the honour and justice of France. So mysterious, his lordship observed, had been this part of their conduct, that it was difficult to understand whether they sought this omission, or were betrayed into it. The country was entitled to know the truth, and his lordship challenged the ministry to avow it. It was palpable, that a deliberate refusal to renew a treaty, admitted but of one construction, that the treaty was abrogated; if the refusal had come from France, the stability of the peace was on a different footing: all former disputes were let loose.

Lord Ellenborough expressed much surprise, that the non-renewal of treaties should have been urged as a serious objection to the definitive treaty. To what purpose was solemn nonsense to be revived? Were not these treaties replete with articles wholly inapplicable to the present political state of Europe? For himself, he could as well think of the revival of the condition of mankind, in some very remote period, as of the ancient treaties which had become inapplicable and obsolete. Our sovereignty in India, his lordship said, rested on the rights of conquest in legitimate war, upon the repeated recognition of all the powers of Europe, and on the best rights of all, possession. His lordship, in a rapid epitome of our history in India, observed, that the acceptance of the Dewanee was a foolish thing, though he honoured the gallantry and ability of Lord Clive. He approved of the arrangement respecting Malta; and thought the cession of the Cape of Good Hope a subject of felicitation rather than of regret. He stated, that the charge at which it must have been retained was enormous; that England could not send thither a single chaldron of coals, without the expense of £20,000; and it was notorious, that when the Dutch were remitting to this country, in the season of scarcity, a scanty supply of grain, the English government had to procure rice and other provisions from India; and was even obliged to send home for a supply of biscuit, not for our troops, but for the Dutch themselves. Much had been said of the free navigation of the Indian seas. Had a British ship been stopped in those seas? For the paltry prerogative of lowering the Dutch flag, he thought there was little magnanimity in exacting of the weaker, more than was required of the stronger powers; and he added, that Portugal was grateful for the services rendered her by the definitive treaty.

The same subject, after being repeatedly alluded to, was finally discussed in the house of commons on the 13th of May. Mr Windham attacked the treaty in its prominent parts. With regard to Malta, he contended, that it must ultimately fall into the hands of the French. The little order of Malta, which contained in itself the great characteristic and distinctive qualities which the French revolution had subverted, was now destroyed. The little phial which contained the essence of the old principles, had been diluted by ministers, not even with common water, but with water from the puddle. The German knights had already refused to serve in a body so degraded and debased; the Neapolitan soldiers would form no security for the independence of the island; the state of Malta was a virtual surrender, and our position in the Mediterranean untenable. The Cape of Good Hope was ceded, in full sovereignty, to the Dutch, who were thus at liberty to resign it to France. It had been said, that the Cape was but a tavern; and surely, Britain, surely a tavern, in the middle of a long voyage, was no unimportant accommodation: without it, the troops destined for the East India service must arrive in that country, in a state which would unfit them for active exertion. No other resting port was open to us except the Brazils; and who was to ensure us constant access there in a season of hostilities? Our Indian empire was, Mr Windham observed, our fleet anchor; and whatever was necessary for its preservation, was of the last importance. The disadvantages on our side, Mr Windham contrasted with the advantages in favour of France. By the restitution of Cochin to the Dutch, they had acquired the means of annoying our possessions in the East Indies. In defining the boundaries of French and Portuguese Guiana, ministers appeared to have been puzzled with the Colapanatuba and Aouari, and that the Aouari was the limit assigned: there was in fact little difference between the treaty of Madrid and that of Badajos. France had obtained her object, the navigation of the river Amazon; and the Portuguese settlements were left exposed to the foe. Mr Windham deplored the cession of Louisiana to France, which, considering the indefinite extent of Guiana, was a surrender of a fourth part of the globe: two rivers, the greatest in the world, the Mississippi in the north, the river of Amazons in the south of America. Rivers were the vital parts of countries; without hyperbole, we might be said to have given away a brace of continents. In aggravation of this thoughtless prodigality, ministers had abandoned the whole continent of Europe to France; they had let in a tide, which spread like a torrent in every direction, endangered our safety at Honduras, and menaced our destruction in India. We already knew the French too well, to doubt that they would scruple what means they used to accomplish their ends. Had they not fraudulently obtained the restitution of Porto Ferrajo to the king of Etruria, to secure it to themselves? Regardless of stipulations and treaties, they had seized on the island of Elba; and, to befool a compensation on the king of Etruria, extorted Piombino from Naples. Mr Windham proceeded to delineate the colossal power of France, which resembled nothing that had existed since the empire of Rome. The French were a new race of Romans; in ten years they had even acquired more than the Romans achieved in fifty-three. On the map of Europe two nations only stood erect; and of those, the one from distance more than strength. Austria was indeed still rich in resources, but destitute of foreign aid. There was no single power which could enter the lists with France. In the first conflict it would be nearly crushed by her tremendous mace: but Mr Windham added, it was by some supposed, that though Europe should be wrecked, we at least might take to our boat and escape. By the spectre of French power, we should still be pursued: In Asia, in America, it would follow close, fearing us with its gorgon aspect. Mr Windham here enumerated the islands ceded to France in the West Indies. He maintained that the establishment of the blacks in St Domingo would be less formidable to this country, than its subjection to France. Admitting that some black emigrants had reached our islands; to private interests such an event might have been more prejudicial, but to political interests less fatal. Mr Windham repeated, that we had given away two continents; and that the object of France obviously was, the attainment of universal empire. He admitted, that the peace must be observed, now that it was entered into; but concluded with a motion for an address, expressive of disapprobation of it.

Lord Hawkebury said, that from some observations of Mr Windham's, it would seem that whenever any continental power, however unconnected with us, became involved with France, it was our duty to volunteer our interference, and our assistance. That we were deeply interested in the destiny of the continent, he was willing to admit; but he conceived our interference with its connexions to be optional, neither inflicted by necessity, nor extorted by honour. At the end of nine years of war, his lordship continued, we had found ourselves deserted by our allies. With the first intimation which his majesty's ministers received of the new constitution of the Italian republic, they had heard of its acceptance by the courts of Vienna, Berlin, and Petersburgh. Under these circumstances, he would submit to the house, whether it was incumbent on us to continue the war on account of the Italian republic. The cession of Louisiana by Spain to France, was another ground of complaint; that province had originally been a French colony, when the Mississippi was the boundary between it and Great Britain; it had been ceded by France to Spain, in a private convention, between the preliminaries and the definitive treaty of 1763; a proof that conventions of this nature, if not right, were at least not new. The value of Louisiana was at present nominal; as a naval station it was allowed to be insignificant; and its vicinity to America was calculated to diminish, rather than augment the attachment of that country to France: he therefore left it to the house to judge whether Louisiana would have justified the renewal of hostilities. Concerning the non-renewal of certain treaties and conventions, his lordship observed, that the principle on which treaties had usually been renewed, appeared not to be understood. The treaty of Westphalia formed a distinct era in the history of Europe; and in order to ascertain the relative situations of the different powers, it had been customary to renew that treaty, together with any particular conventions subsequent to it. In the present instance, it was to be considered, that formerly all preceding treaties had been renewed by all other powers of Europe. In the present war no European power had done so; and consequently, if we renewed former treaties, we only should be bound whilst other nations were free. By renewing former treaties, we should have been forced to sanction all the recent encroachments of France; and by sanctioning the treaty of Luneville we should have been accessory to the dismemberment of the Germanic empire. With regard to commercial treaties, it was impossible to renew them, without renewing stipulations respecting rights of neutrality, and personal privileges, detrimental to our interests. His lordship represented the definitive treaty as coinciding with the preliminary treaty which had previously received the sanction of the house. In regard to the permanence of the peace, he was willing to admit, and to deplore, that, in the present state of the world, any peace was insecure; but the precarious tenure on which this blessing was to be held, was no reason for Britain for rejecting it. France had renounced her revolutionary principles, and resumed the old maxims of politics and religion. After the preceding convulsions, a good government was hardly to be expected; an ameliorated government was however gradually forming from the ruins of revolution. Had France remained under the Bourbons, she would have been equally our rival; under all governments her ambition would have been the same. Finally, his lordship observed, that we had emerged from a dangerous war with our resources and credit unimpaired, and that it was improper to waste them or the spirit of the country. An exultation had been manifested on the signing of the preliminaries, which he should have been concerned to witness on the conclusion of any peace; and no stronger argument could be adduced of the expediency of respiring from the war. He concluded with moving an address to his majesty, to testify the satisfaction of the house, on the conclusion of the definitive treaty.

Mr Dundas opposed Mr Windham. He said, that we had now acquired the undoubted sovereignty of India. In his judgment, however, the Cape and Ceylon formed our two great bulwarks, and he never would have consented to the surrender of the former. He acknowledged that the cession of Malta was to him a subject of equal regret; and that to the relinquishment of either of those places he should have refused his assent, had he continued in administration; but he would not support the address moved by Mr Windham, because it contained an invective against the peace.

The debate was adjourned, and continued on the following day. Sir William Young contended, that when a standing army was deemed essential to the preservation of peace, it was proper that the people should be informed of the state of affairs which justified such a measure. He contended, that France had an ascendancy in Italy, which subjected Malta to her power, whilst the Italian republic, instead of being an independent state, was a French province. A new langue was formed of the inhabitants of Malta, who were chiefly composed of goldiners, and mostly spoke the Arab dialect; and these were to affiliate with an ancient body of venerable nobility. He predicted, that the nobles would refuse to incorporate with the new langue, who would consequently place the island in the hands of our foes. He reverted to the cession of Louisiana; and ascribed that, with other evils, to the non-renewal of the treaty of Utrecht, which has stipulated, that France should acquire no new possessions on the continent of America. He took a survey of the French power in the West Indies, and concluded with saying, that what Rome had been, France would be.

Lord Castlereagh remarked, that our grand object, from the commencement to the close of the war, had been the establishment of general security; that the gradual extinction of jacobin principles, and the gradual restoration of order and tranquillity, had been given as sureties for the peace. With regard to the territorial acquisitions of France, he admitted, that they might eventually become of infinite importance; but he contended, that they were not pregnant with immediate mischief, and only could be the sources of distant danger. He reprobed the timidity which had been felt and expressed, as calculated only to depress the spirit of this nation, and to elevate that of our rival. His lordship lamented the diminution of our influence on the continent; but suggested, that to regain that influence, we must give back to France her colonial possessions. He maintained, that with the revival of her commerce, and the cultivation of her colonies, our interests would increase. He compared the imports and exports of the two countries; and stated our imports to have increased during the war, from 19 to 30 millions, and our exports, within the same period, to have augmented from 24 to 43 millions; articles of British manufacture exported, to have risen from 18 to 24 millions, and our tonnage from 1,600,000 to 2,100,000; our mercantile seamen, to have increased from 118,000 to 143,000, although 120,000 sailors had been employed in the navy. On the other hand, what were the commercial resources of France? In 1777, the latest period previous to the war at which any regular account was obtainable, the French exports were twelve and the French imports nine millions. From the West Indies, their imports were about seven millions and a half, their exports about two millions and a half at the same period; from their colonies last year, their imports did not exceed in value 61,000l., their exports not more than 41,000l. Admitting, then, that at the commencement of a commercial rivalry, the exports of France should amount to seven, her imports to eight millions; whilst our exports amounted to 43, and our imports to 23 millions; what had we to fear from the contest? As little reason, observed his lordship, had we to dread any prohibition on our manufactures by France or her allies. It could not be the interest of a poor country to purchase dear articles, in preference to those that were cheaper; and allowing that France could be absurd enough to exclude our manufactures from her own ports, could the extort from the powers under her influence a similar prohibition? His lordship here reverted to the year 1800, when our exports to the continent of Europe amounted to 7,500,000l., though the prohibition against our goods was more general than it had ever been. He enumerated the countries independent on French influence; Denmark, Sweden, Russia, Prussia, Poland, and Germany. The only countries under the domination of France were Holland, Spain, Portugal, and the Italian states. To Portugal the influence of France could extend only during war; and since Venice was under the emperor, at one extremity of Italy, and Naples lay at the other, he saw little to apprehend from any prohibition which France might seek to effect. In the West Indies, his lordship observed, the prospect was yet more satisfactory; the annual value of British produce sent to these islands did not exceed eight millions, an amount, which, when contrasted with the great aggregate of our exports, was of little importance; in the present state of her manufactures, however, France would be compelled to supply her colonies from the British market. With regard to St Domingo, his lordship stated, that on a moderate calculation, about one half, or nearly 300,000 of the blacks had perished since the commencement of disorder in the island. Allowing this defection, and estimating ting each man at 60l. the sum of 18 millions would be necessary to provide for the island the ordinary complement of black inhabitants. Was it probable, that France should possess the capital to make this purchase, without which, the island would be of little value? His lordship concluded with recommending a vigorous establishment, adequate to the protection of our rights, independence, and honour.

Mr Addington said, that he desired not that the treaty should be praised. He had never regarded it with sentiments of exultation; never lavished on it panegyric: he was content, that the honour of the country was unfilled by the measure he had adopted. If he were asked, why, after the transactions at Lyons, no remonstrance had been made to France? he might answer, that it was wrong to put questions, which his duty as minister forbade him to resolve. This he would say, that, had the negotiation failed, it was the intention of his majesty's ministers, to have laid every document concerning it before the house. He acknowledged, that the territorial acquisitions of France could not be viewed without regret; but there were events which we could not control, and dispensations in which we must acquiesce; he should rejoice to see the resources of this country economized by peace. He trusted, that peace would be preserved; or, should the war be renewed, hateful as was that supposition, it would be a satisfaction to every man in that house to reflect, that nothing had been neglected for the preservation of peace. He would even say, that we were pursuing the best course for war, by husbanding our resources, at a period we had the liberty of doing so; or, what was better, of preventing a war, by being prepared to meet it.

Mr Sheridan treated the subject with some gaiety. He said, he supported the peace, because he was convinced that ministers could obtain no better; their predecessors had left them to choose between an expensive, bloody, fruitless war, and a hollow perilous peace. He attacked the new oppositionists, who had been supporters of the former administration, and demanded for what did we go to war? Why, to prevent French aggrandisement. Have we done that? No. Then we are to rescue Holland: Is that accomplished? No. Brabant is the fine qua non: Is it gained? No. Then come security and indemnity. Are they obtained? No. The late minister told us, that the example of a jacobin government in Europe, founded on the ruins of a holy altar, and the tomb of a martyred monarch, was a spectacle so dreadful and infectious to chivalry, that we could never be safe while it existed, and could do nothing short of our last effort for its destruction. For these fine words, continued Mr Sheridan, which had at last given way to fearinity and indemnity, we had laid out near 200,000 lives, and nearly 300 millions of money, and had gained Ceylon and Trinidad. But one grand consolation remained, Bonaparte was to be the extirpator of jacobinism; the champion of jacobinism was to become a parricide; the child of sin was to destroy his mother; he had begged pardon of God and man, piously restored bishops with the salaries of curates, and penitently extorted of them a solemn oath to turn spies and informers in his favour. It had been said, that France must have colonies to be afraid of war; that is the way to make Bonaparte love peace. Britain has had, to be sure, a rough military education; but if you put him behind the counter a little, he will mend exceedingly. When he was reading the treaty he thought all the names of foreign places, Pondicherry, Chandernagore, Cochin, Martinico, all effusions. No such thing; they are so many traps or holes to catch this silly fellow in, and make a merchant of him. Mr Sheridan said, that at present in Britain, nobody knew who was minister, as the present ministers continued to identify themselves with the former. That when the ex-minister quitted his office, almost all the subordinate ministers kept their places. Of the late minister he said, that none more admired his splendid talents than he did. If ever man was formed to give lustre to his country, he was that man. He had no low, little, mean, petty vices; he had too much good sense, taste, and talents, to fet his mind upon ribbands, stars, and titles; he was not of a nature to be the tool and creature of any court: but great as were his talents, he had misapplied them in the politics of this country, he had augmented our national debt, and diminished our population. He had done more to abridge our privileges, to strengthen the crown at the expense of the constitution, than any minister he could mention. Mr Sheridan concluded with moving, as an amendment to Lord Hawkebury's address, that it was the opinion of that house, that the omission of various opportunities of negotiating peace with advantage to this country, more especially the rejection of the overtures made by the first consul of France in January 1800, appeared to that house to have led to that state of affairs, which rendered peace so necessary, as to justify the painful sacrifices which his majesty had been advised to make for the attainment thereof. The address proposed by Lord Hawkebury was carried by a very great majority.

During this session of parliament, the most important operation of finance, consisted of the repeal of the tax upon income, which gave great satisfaction. Indeed, in their whole conduct, administration conducted themselves with a degree of moderation and prudence, which greatly conciliated towards them the minds of the public. They defended on all occasions the former ministry, against the attacks of the old opposition; and in return, they were supported by a considerable number of the members of that administration, including Mr Pitt. At the same time, they did not appear unwilling to enter into political connections with the members of the old opposition. Parliament was prorogued on the 28th of June, and dissolved on the following day. The elections which immediately succeeded, exhibited the singular spectacle of an administration, that avoided interfering in the choice of the members of parliament. The members and friends, however, of the old administration, together with their opponents, were abundantly active.

The effect of the change of ministry had by this time been very sensibly felt over the whole island, the change during the preceding ten years, the minds of men had, in a less or greater degree, been kept in a state of constant alarm from the fear of plots and conspiracies against the government; and from the apprehension, that a most dangerous disaffected party was at all times ready to burst forth into action; and that the British constitution constitution was only preserved in consequence of the suspension of the habeas corpus act and other legislative restraints, aided by the extreme vigilance of administration, and of their friends, in repelling disaffected persons. Hence society existed under a sort of general apprehension and distrust; and persons originally unfriendly to the war, suffered, in all departments of business, and in every quarter of the country, a considerable degree of political persecution. All this had now passed away; the new ministers suffered the penal and restraining laws quietly to expire, and the constitution to depend for support upon its own strength and the ancient provisions of the law; they gave themselves no trouble about the general sentiments of the people with regard to speculative subjects, and seemed willing to conciliate the good will of all orders of the state. The consequence was, that all the fears and anxiety which formerly existed about the safety of the constitution, seemed to pass away like a dream, and an universal attachment to the institutions of the country appeared to exist, without any jealousy that danger to their safety was to be apprehended from any quarter; and political animosities, being no longer fed by alarms excited by government, were as if by a sort of enchantment appealed and forgotten.

With regard to the effects of peace upon the British and French nations, they promised at first to be extremely favourable to the general interests of humanity. The French had successfully defended their own independence, and in their turn had assisted those by whom it had been menaced, with such a persevering energy as secured to them a portion of respect from the British nation; while on the other hand the maritime triumphs of Britain had been so splendid during the whole war, and the valor of her troops in Egypt had been so distinguished, as to secure to this country a high degree of consideration in the eyes of the French. The people of the two countries accordingly seemed eager to unite into habits of great intimacy with each other. Very considerable numbers of Frenchmen came over into Britain; while at the same time multitudes of persons of all ranks hastened from Britain, to visit a country that had of late years excited in so remarkable a degree the attention of all the nations of Europe, and been the scene of such extraordinary transactions. Upon this tendency of the two nations, thus reciprocally to abandon their mutual animosities, a system of commercial intercourse might have been reared, of a nature much more perfect and simple than that created by Mr Pitt's commercial treaty. There is no reason to believe, that any disposition existed on the part of the British government to stand aloof from France, or to avoid, for any political reason, the extension of our commerce into that country. There can be no doubt that such an intercourse would have proved favourable to France in every point of view. It would have enabled her people to derive considerable aid from the great capital of British merchants, which would have been rapidly and liberally advanced towards promoting the culture of their wines and other valuable productions. Even in a political point of view, France would have derived aggrandisement from such a connexion. What she wanted was a navy to enable her to defend her colonies, or even contend with any chance of success against Britain in the event of a future war. This she could only obtain by means of commerce, and commerce could in no way be better encouraged than by engaging continually in trade with the first commercial nation upon earth.

But it was now to be demonstrated to mankind, that Conduct of a man may be qualified to lead armies successfully to the French battle, to overrun provinces, and to attain the envied government title of a conqueror, who at the same time possesses only a very moderate portion of magnanimity, of self-command, or knowledge of the rules of sound policy or the best interests of nations. The French government, instead of seizing the opportunity of encouraging their people to become commercial, and thus gradually acquire wealth, and form a maritime power, by laying open their ports, and holding out to Britain a commercial treaty upon the most liberal principles, shut their own ports more closely than during the most violent period of the war. They vainly fancied, in this way, that they would enable their own manufacturers to rival those of Britain, while in fact they only excluded their wines from the British market; and by thus losing the only sure and ready mode of attracting riches into their country, they prevented the acquisition by enterprising individuals of a large capital gained by trade, without which no manufactures can ever greatly prosper. They idly thought they were in this way limiting the trade of Britain, which having all the rest of the world open to its efforts, could not thus be injured, and thus in truth they only injured themselves.

With similar ill policy, or at least with a restless spirit of ambition, the French government could not abstain from pursuing aggrandisement by those efforts of violence which are only tolerable in the midst of war, but which in peace justly excite the jealousy and indignation of mankind.

One of the first enterprises of Bonaparte, in consequence of the peace, was to reduce under his power the island of St Domingo. That great and fertile island had suffered the most severe calamities in consequence of the revolution. These had terminated in the emancipation of the negroes from slavery; and they had formed themselves into a regular and sufficiently orderly government, at the head of which was one of their own race, Toussaint, a man of humanity, and, it is said, of considerable talents. Reports were circulated in Europe, that he wished to render St Domingo independent of France; but of this there is no proof; and it is probable that his chief offence consisted of the general estimation and personal consequence to which he had attained; and that the despotic spirit of Bonaparte could endure no appearance of elevation of character, or of independence, in any part of the French territory. Nor was it unnatural that under a military government force should have been employed in preference to any methods of conciliation. At the end of the year 1801, an army of 25,000 men was sent out to St Domingo; and as single ships and small squadrons continued to fail during the winter, loaded with troops, it is believed that near 40,000 men were employed in what might be called the first division of the expedition. We have very defective accounts of their proceedings, but they appear to have been extremely disgraceful on the part of the French. The negro chiefs having refused unconditional submission, they were attacked, and having been defeated in several battles, disunion among themselves took place, and Toussaint was at last induced to enter into a negotiation. The terms of the treaty were concealed; but, as he was still at the head of a respectable force, it is believed that the possession not only of his personal freedom, but the undisturbed enjoyment of his property, was secured to him, and his followers were promised a full indemnity. This took place in the beginning of May 1801.

The French general, Le Clerc, the brother-in-law of the chief consul, no sooner perceived the negro chief in his power, and the tranquillity of the colony apparently re-established, than he immediately accomplished one of the basest acts of treachery that ever disgraced a government. The abdicated general was accused of a conspiracy, though it was evident there was not time from his submission to his seizure even to meditate, much less to organize, such a measure. On the 12th of May, Toussaint, with his whole family, was put on board a frigate, and, contrary to the most solemn treaty, shipped off for France. There he soon perished, in consequence of harsh usage in prison. The negroes of St Domingo soon perceived themselves to be betrayed and deceived. An attempt was made to reduce them back into a state of slavery after they had now enjoyed freedom for several years, and they were publicly sold as formerly. The chiefs who had been prevailed with to desert Toussaint, and whose defection had led to his surrender, now justly learning that they were destined to partake in the miserable fate of their deluded colleague, betook themselves to flight. The whole island revolted. The climate came in aid of these avengers of tyranny and falsehood. The miserable instrument of the first consul's cruelty fell himself the victim of the climate. After a series of horrors and atrocities, even worse than those which blacken the memory of Robespierre, Marat, and Carrier, and which will, to future ages, remain a lasting stain on the French character; the republic had to regret the loss of 60,000 of her best troops, in a vain attempt to subdue a colony, which might, with temper and humanity, have been conciliated.

In Europe the conduct of the French government was not less arbitrary. The whole fortresses of Piedmont were dismantled, and that country ultimately annexed to France. The same was done with regard to the duchy of Parma and Placentia. The Swits, in the mean time, whole form of government had been altered in imitation of that of France, wished to restore the ancient constitutions of the cantons, under which their ancestors had prospered during so many ages. Their present leaders, however, who had risen to power by the protection of France, solicited the interference of Bonaparte in their favour. He accordingly sent a numerous army against Switzerland, and in spite of the remonstrances of the British court, placed the sovereignty in the hands of his own dependents or adherents.

After all their struggles for freedom, the French nation now submitted to a confirmed military despotism. When Bonaparte first assumed the appellation of chief consul, it was under the declaration, that his office would only endure, in terms of the constitution then promulgated, for ten years. But this constitution was now altered, and the assent of the people was demanded to a new constitution, by which Bonaparte was to remain consul for life, and even to possess the power of nominating his own successor. Suffrages to this measure were obtained to the number of 3,577,259. The event was celebrated with the highest magnificence in Paris; and addresses of congratulation were presented from the different courts of the continent of Europe, and even from the emperor of Germany.

These transactions could not fail to be noticed in Britain, and to be the subject of remark in the public between newspapers. In these the unprincipled ambition of Bonaparte, and the degraded character and state of the French nation, became topics of frequent discussion. It appears that Bonaparte very early became jealous upon this head. The English had long boasted, in consequence of their political freedom, of their superiority as a people over their enslaved neighbours of France; and the first consul, no doubt, dreaded lest the vanity of his subjects should be wounded by representations, coming from the free press of England, of the state into which they had fallen. A great degree of irritation was thus produced in the French government against England; and the chief consul even went so far as not only to prohibit the importation of English newspapers into France, but to demand from our government, that the best bulwark of British freedom should be done away, by imposing restrictions upon the liberty of the press. He was weak enough, through the medium of the French official journal, to commence a contest of argument and of eloquence against the writers of English newspapers. In such a warfare he could not fail to be beaten; because they had nothing else to do but to write, and because the obscurity of their situation, as individuals, enabled them to inflict wounds without fear of reprisals. Such writers also had much to gain by such a contest, as they could wish for nothing more favourable to their employment, than to be enabled, during a dull and monotonous period of peace, to render their lucubrations interesting, and to amuse their readers, by engaging in a paper war with the great Bonaparte. These circumstances, however, added to the restless ambition of this personage, and his obvious want of discernment of the true interests of France, or want of patience to pursue them, left little reason to hope that the peace so recently concluded would be of long duration.

The new parliament assembled on the 16th of November. Mr Abbot was chosen speaker of the house of commons; and on the 22nd of the same month his majesty, in a speech from the throne, congratulated the country on having experienced the bounty of divine providence in the produce of an abundant harvest. He remarked, that the state of the manufactures, commerce, and revenues of the united kingdom was flourishing beyond example; and that the loyalty and attachment which were manifested to the king's person and government, afforded the strongest indication of the just sense that was entertained of the numerous blessings enjoyed under the protection of our happy constitution. "In my intercourse with foreign powers," (continued his majesty), "I have been actuated by a sincere disposition for the maintenance of peace. It is nevertheless impossible for me to lose sight of that established and wise system of policy by which the interests..." terests of the other states are connected with our own. I cannot therefore be indifferent to any material change in their relative condition and strength. My conduct will be invariably regulated by a due consideration of the actual situation of Europe, and by a watchful solicitude for the permanent welfare of my people.

"You will, I am persuaded, agree with me in thinking that it is incumbent on us to adopt those means of security, which are best calculated to afford the prospect of preserving to my subjects the blessings of peace." In both houses, the usual address was agreed to unanimously and without debate.

About this time, Colonel Despard, and six persons of low rank, were executed for high treason. He was an Irish gentleman, of a good family. He had long been under close confinement, during the late administration, upon suspicion of entertaining criminal designs against government. His imagination, while under seclusion from society, appeared to have become inflamed nearly to madness. After his liberation, in consequence of the habeas corpus act being no longer suspended, he had associated with a number of mean persons, whom he had induced to imagine, that they were capable of overturning the government, and altering the constitution. They took an oath to this effect, and agreed to attack the king at the meeting of parliament, to seize the Tower and the bank, and to incite a general insurrection. Their criminal engagements with each other were fully proved. Their execution was attended with no particular consequences.

In proposing the supplies, on the 10th of December, Mr Addington made some remarks, which are not unworthy of attention in a historical point of view. He said, that the year 1792 had, in general, been the most prosperous year of our finance. The permanent taxes in that year amounted to £13,853,000. In the last year, the permanent taxes produced nearly double that sum; their produce amounting to no less than £26,829,000. He could now from experience congratulate the house, and assure them, that the revenue was constantly and regularly on the increase. There was every reason to look forward, with the utmost confidence, to the growing prosperity of our commerce and manufactures. The amounts of imports had been greatly swelled, by the large importation of grain. They amounted in that year to £25,500,000. In the part of the present year which had expired, they amounted, without that aid, to £15,620,000. Our general exports, in 1801, amounted to 42 millions. The exports of the present year, he had reason to believe, would fall little short of 50 millions, their real value being taken. The number of vessels which entered into the port of London in 1801, was 338; in 1802, it was 4750. The tonnage of those vessels was in 1801, 418,631; in 1802, 574,971. The number of men navigating in 1801, was 23,096; in 1802, 26,251. This was, he trusted, fully sufficient to justify the attention which he had lately made, that the commerce and navigation of this country had not suffered from the operations of the tonnage duty. It was to be observed, that what we gained by our traffic, others did not lose; other powers had, therefore, no more reason to look on our commercial pursuits with jealousy, than we had to look on theirs with fear. In the latter respect, it was justly said last night, by a noble friend near him (Lord Hawkebury) we had fairly got the start of them. This pre-eminence he had no doubt that we should retain, as long as we preserved our superiority in commerce, credit, and capital. The great instrument of their conservation was the sinking fund, which, as it had supported us under every difficulty, so now he was convinced it would uphold and maintain our present prosperity. When this great plan was proposed, in 1786, by his right honourable friend Mr Pitt, who was now absent, the public debt was 238 millions. The fund, at that time, was no more than one-tenth of the interest on the debt, but though the latter had greatly increased, the fund had advanced more in proportion, as it now amounted to one-third of the interest.

In the mean while, some difficulties occurred in the execution of the treaty of Amiens. The British ministry had avoided engaging in a quarrel with Bonaparte, on account of his continental usurpation, because they found no power willing to join with them in resisting him; but his restless ambition induced him to endeavour to lay hold of the island of Malta; and his impatient spirit prevented his conducting the plan with such caution as might enable him to avoid suspicion, and ensure success. That island was defined, by the treaty, to be intrusted to the order of St John. Without waiting till the British should abandon it, Bonaparte instantly set on foot negotiations with the different countries to which the knights of the order belonged, to procure the abolition of the order, the confiscation of its revenues, and the prohibition of the future enrolment of knights, or their departure to Malta. Having accomplished these objects, he required the British government to deliver up the island to a grand master, appointed, at his instigation, by the pope; or to the king of Naples, who was to receive possession, in the first instance, for behoof of the knights. As, strictly speaking, there was thus no longer any order of Malta to defend the island, and as the king of Naples was at all times at the mercy of France; the evacuation of Malta by the British troops, in the present state of affairs, would have been equivalent to transferring it to this last power. The British ministry had submitted to the late continental acquisitions of France, from want of means to oppose them; but they resolved to oppose the seizure of an island, because the superiority of the British fleet enabled them successfully to do so. This determination appears to have greatly perplexed the vehement and irritable mind of Bonaparte. No successful resistance had hitherto been made to any of his continental enterprises; and as the attempt now made, to refuse delivery of the island of Malta to the king of Naples, and the nominal grand master of the order of St John, could only be justified by accusing him of having acted fraudulently against the spirit of the treaty; so an acquiescence on his part in the retention of the island, contrary to the express stipulations of the treaty of Amiens, would have been equal to a confession of guilt. In this situation he found himself detected in a deceit, deceit, which he was unwilling to acknowledge; while, at the same time, he suffered the additional mortification of having sacrificed his reputation, without any profit in return, because the irresistible power of the British navy rendered it impossible for him to seize Malta by force. While he remained under this dilemma, a conversation occurred between him and the British ambassador, Lord Whitworth. As the fortunes of Bonaparte have been too extraordinary, not to render him for ages a prominent object in history, it may be worth while, for the sake of throwing all possible light upon his character and actions, to record the conversation alluded to, in the terms in which it was reported to the British court. Lord Whitworth, in a letter of the 21st of February, to Lord Hawkebury, says:

"I received a note from M. Talleyrand (minister for foreign affairs), informing me, the first consul desired to converse with me, and that I would come to him at the Tuileries, at nine o'clock. He received me in his cabinet, with tolerable cordiality; and after talking on different subjects, for a few minutes, he desired me to sit down, as he himself did, on the other side of the table, and began. He told me, that he felt it necessary, after what had passed between me and M. de Talleyrand, that he should in the most clear and authentic manner make known his sentiments to me, in order to their being communicated to his majesty, and he conceived, this would be more effectually done by himself, than through any medium whatever. He said, that it was a matter of infinite disappointment to him, that the treaty of Amiens, instead of being followed by conciliation and friendship, the natural effects of peace, had been productive only of continual and increasing jealousy and mistrust; and that this mistrust was now avowed in such a manner, as must bring the point to an issue. He now enumerated the several provocations which he pretended to have received from England. He placed in the first line, our not evacuating Malta and Alexandria, as we were bound to do by treaty. In this, he said, that no consideration on earth would make him acquiesce, and of the two, he had rather see us in possession of the Fauxbourg St Antoine, than Malta. He then adverted to the abuse thrown out against him, in the English public prints: but this, he said, he did not so much regard as that which appeared in French papers published in London. This he considered as much more mischievous, since it meant to excite this country against him and his government. He complained of the protection given to Georges, and others of his description, who, instead of being sent to Canada, as had been repeatedly promised, were permitted to remain in England, handsomely pensioned, and were constantly committing all sorts of crimes on the coasts of France, as well as in the interior. In confirmation of this, he told me, that two men had within these few days been apprehended in Normandy, and were now on their way to Paris, who were hired assassins, and employed by the bishop of Arras, by Georges, and by Duthell, as would be fully proved in a court of justice, and made known to the world. He acknowledged, that the irritation he felt against England increased daily, because every wind (I make use as much as I can of his own ideas and expressions) which blew from England, brought nothing but enmity and hatred against him.

"He now went back to Egypt, and told me, that if he had felt the slightest inclination to take possession of it by force, he might have done it a month ago, by sending 25,000 men to Aboukir, who would have possessed themselves of the whole country, in defiance of the 4000 British in Alexandria. That instead of that garrison being a means of protecting Egypt, it was only furnishing him a pretence for invading it. This he would not do, whatever might be his desire to have it as a colony; because he did not think it worth the risk of a war, in which he perhaps might be considered as the aggressor, and by which he should lose more than he could gain, since, sooner or later, Egypt would belong to France, either by the falling to pieces of the Turkish empire, or by some arrangement with the Porte.

"As a proof of his desire to maintain peace, he wished to know what he had to gain by going to war with England. A descent was the only means of offence he had, and that he was determined to attempt by putting himself at the head of the expedition. But how could it be supposed, that after having gained the height on which he stood, he would risk his life and reputation, in such a hazardous attempt, unless forced to it by necessity, when the chances were that he and the greatest part of his expedition would go to the bottom of the sea. He talked much on this subject, but never affected to diminish the danger. He acknowledged, that there were a hundred chances to one against him; but still he was determined to attempt it, if war should be the consequence of the present discussion; and such was the disposition of the troops, that army after army would be found for the enterprise.

"He then expatiated much on the natural force of the two countries. France with an army of 480,000 men, for to this amount it is, he said, to be immediately completed, all ready for the most desperate enterprises; and England with a fleet that made her mistress of the seas, and which he did not think he should be able to equal in less than ten years. Two such countries, by a proper understanding, might govern the world, but by their strifes might overturn it. He said, that if he had not felt the enmity of the British government on every occasion since the treaty of Amiens, there would have been nothing that he would not have done, to prove his desire to conciliate; participation in indemnities as well as in influence on the continent, treaties of commerce, in short, anything that could have given satisfaction, and have testified his friendship. Nothing had, however, been able to conquer the hatred of the British government, and, therefore, it was now come to the point, whether we should have peace or war? To preserve peace, the treaty of Amiens must be fulfilled; the abuse in the public prints, if not totally suppressed, at least kept within bounds, and confined to the English papers; and the protection so openly given to his bitterest enemies, (alluding to Georges, and persons of that description), must be withdrawn. If war, it was necessary only to say so, and to refuse to fulfil the treaty." The result of this conversation, and of some suspicious circumstances in the conduct of the French, was that on the 8th of March, the following message was addressed by the king to the house of commons. "His majesty thinks it necessary to acquaint the house of commons, that as very considerable military preparations are carrying on in the ports of France and Holland, he has judged it expedient to adopt additional measures of precaution for the security of his dominions. Though the preparations to which his majesty refers, are avowedly directed to colonial service, yet as discussions of great importance are now subsisting between his majesty and the French government, the result of which must at present be uncertain, his majesty is induced to make this communication to his faithful commons, in the full persuasion, that while they partake of his majesty's earnest and unvarying solicitude for the continuance of peace, he may rely with perfect confidence on their public spirit and liberality, to enable his majesty to adopt such measures as circumstances may appear to require, for supporting the honour of his crown, and the essential interests of his people." Upon the motion of Mr Addington, the house voted an address, agreeing unanimously to support the crown in the measures proposed. It speedily appeared, that the preparations which had been alluded to in the king's message were extremely trifling.

Bonaparte had obliged the Spaniards to cede to him the sovereignty of Louisiana, in North America, that is to say, the great country to the south-west of the river Mississippi, which lies between the United States and the Spanish province of Mexico; and an armament, with about 4000 troops, was now preparing to leave the ports of Holland, to take possession of the territory thus acquired. The government of the United States opposed this measure; and the state of Kentucky sent notice to the president, that 10,000 volunteers had enrolled themselves, and were resolved, with or without the aid of the union, to resist the settlement of the French in their neighbourhood. Bonaparte, who probably had no serious intention of effecting such a settlement, sold for a sum of money to the United States of North America, the country of Louisiana; a country inhabited by many independent tribes of savages, and to which, upon the principles of natural justice, neither he, nor the Spaniards, nor the Americans, had any right. But the inhabitants of Europe, and even the transatlantic race of Europeans, had now for some ages been accustomed to regard all foreign countries as unoccupied property, which they may seize and transfer to each other, without regard to the natural inhabitants, whom they consider as beings of a subordinate race and character. Accordingly, this transference of Louisiana excited no surprise in Europe.

In the meanwhile, as the king's message to the house of commons, already mentioned, demonstrated a determination on the part of the British government to prefer a new war, to suffering Bonaparte to carry farther his ambitious projects; the mind of that person seems to have been wrought up to a strange degree of irritation. In his palace, he affected to use all the forms of the ancient French court. At the drawing-room, where he was waited upon by the whole ambassadors of Europe, and by a numerous assemblage of persons of high rank from all countries, he could not preserve the forms of ordinary civility to the British ambassador; and Lord Whitworth, in a despatch of the 14th of March, which was afterwards communicated to parliament, gave the following account of the behaviour of the first consul, on one occasion, at the court of the Tuileries:—"He accosted me, evidently under very considerable agitation. He began, by asking me if I had any news from England? I told him I had received a letter from Lord Hawkesbury two days ago. He immediately said, And so you are determined to go to war? No, I replied; we are too sensible of the advantages of peace. We have had war for 15 years already. As he seemed to wait for an answer, I observed only, we have had too much of it. But you wish to carry it on for 15 years longer, and you force me to it. I told him, that it was very far from his majesty's intentions. He then proceeded to Count Marcow, and the chevalier Azara, who were standing together at a little distance from me, and said to them, The English wish for war; but if they are the first to draw the sword, I shall be the last to sheath it: they have no regard to treaties: henceforth they should cover them with black crape. In a few minutes he came back to me, and resumed the conversation, by something personally civil to me. He began again, Why these armaments? Against what are these measures of precaution? I have not a single ship of the line in the ports of France; but if you wish to arm, I will arm also. If you wish to fight, I will fight also. You may perhaps destroy, but you will never intimidate France. We with neither the one nor the other. It is our desire to live in good understanding with her. You must regard treaties then. Confusion to those who have no regard to treaties: they will be responsible for it to all Europe. He was too much agitated to make it advisable for me to prolong the conversation. I therefore made no answer; and he retired to his apartment repeating the last phrase.

"It is to be remarked, that all this passed loud enough to be heard by 200 people, who were present; and I am persuaded, that there was not a single person who did not feel the impropriety of his conduct, and the total want of dignity as well as of decency on the occasion."

In the mean time, the negotiations proceeded. Bonaparte still insisted upon the literal fulfilment of the treaty of Amiens. He appears to have flattered himself, that the British ministry would not venture to renew the war on account of Malta. Their pacific dispositions were well known: they had suffered him to make great encroachments upon the continent, without engaging in hostilities. They were underfed to consist of men, who were not the leaders of any party, but had only held a subordinate rank as supporters of Mr Pitt's administration; and they had been loudly accused in Britain by the ex-ministers, and by many of the old opposition, of want of talents and want of spirit, on account of the apparent tameness with which they had recently acted. Hence it seems likely that Bonaparte presumed that they would ultimately give way to his demands. But the good temper and forbearance of administration, had the effect of rousing, in a very great degree, the spirit of the British nation, and Britain, and of inducing a great proportion of the people to will to engage in a war, against a man whom they now detest as an odious usurper. Thus encouraged, administration rose in their demands of the price to be paid by France for the continuance of peace. On the 12th of May, Lord Whitworth presented the ultimatum of the British government, which was in these terms:

"1. The French government shall engage to make no opposition to the cession of the island of Lampedusa to his majesty, by the king of the two Sicilies.

"2. In consequence of the present state of the island of Lampedusa, his majesty shall remain in possession of the island of Malta, until such arrangements shall be made by him, as may enable his majesty to occupy Lampedusa as a naval station; after which period, the island of Malta shall be given up to the inhabitants, and acknowledged as an independent state.

"3. The territories of the Batavian republic shall be evacuated by the French forces, within one month after the conclusion of a convention founded on the principles of this project.

"4. The king of Etruria, and the Italian and Ligurian republics, shall be acknowledged by his majesty.

"5. Switzerland shall be evacuated by the French forces.

"6. A suitable territorial provision shall be assigned to the king of Sardinia in Italy.

"Secret article.—His majesty shall not be required by the French government to evacuate the island of Malta, until after the expiration of ten years.

"Articles 4, 5, 6, may be entirely omitted, or must all be inserted."

This proposal having been rejected, war was announced on the 16th of May, by a message from the king to the two houses of parliament. On the 21st of May a declaration, justifying this measure, was inserted in the London gazette. As the statements contained in it are sufficiently candid, and exhibit an authentic detail of the public acts which occasioned this renewal of the war, we shall here insert a few of its most important paragraphs. "As soon as the treaty of Amiens was concluded, his majesty's courts were open to the people of France, for every purpose of legal redress. All sequestrations were taken off their property; all prohibitions on their trade, which had been imposed during the war, were removed; and they were placed on the same footing, with regard to commerce and intercourse, as the inhabitants of any other state in amity with his majesty with which there existed no treaty of commerce.

"To a system of conduct, thus open, liberal, and friendly, the proceedings of the French government afforded the most striking contrast. The prohibitions which had been placed on the commerce of his majesty's subjects during the war, have been enforced with increased strictness and severity. Violence has been offered in several instances to their vessels and their property; and in no case has justice been afforded to those who may have been aggrieved in consequence of such acts; nor has any satisfactory answer been given to the repeated representations made by his majesty's ministers or ambassadors at Paris. Under such circumstances, when his majesty's subjects were not suffered to enjoy the common advantages of peace within the territories of the French republic, and the countries dependent upon it, the French government had recourse to the extraordinary measure of sending over to this country a number of persons, for the professed purpose of residing in the most considerable sea-port towns of Great Britain and Ireland, in the character of commercial agents or consuls. These persons could have no pretensions to be acknowledged in that character; as the right of being so acknowledged, as well as the privileges attached to such a situation, could only be derived from a commercial treaty; and as no treaty of that description was in existence between his majesty and the French republic.

"There was consequently too much reason to suppose, that the real object of their mission was by no means of a commercial nature: and this suspicion was confirmed, not only by the circumstance that some of them were military men, but by the actual discovery, that several of them were furnished with instructions to obtain the foundations of the harbours, and to procure military surveys of the places where it was intended they should reside. His majesty felt it to be his duty to prevent their departure to their respective places of destination, and represented to the French government the necessity of withdrawing them; and it cannot be denied, that the circumstances under which they were sent, and the instructions which were given to them, ought to be considered as decisive indications of the dispositions and intentions of the government by whom they were employed.

"If the French government had really appeared to be actuated by a due attention to such a system; if their dispositions had proved to be essentially pacific, allowance would have been made for the situation in which a new government must be placed, after so dreadful and extensive a convulsion, as had been produced by the French revolution. But his majesty has unfortunately had too much reason to observe and to lament, that the system of violence, aggression, and aggravement, which characterized the proceedings of the different governments of France during the war, has been continued with as little disguise since its termination. They have continued to keep a French army in Holland, against the will, and in defiance of the remonstrances, of the Batavian government, and in repugnance to the letter of their solemn treaties. They have, in a period of peace, invaded the territory, and violated the independence of the Swiss nation, in defiance of the treaty of Luneville, which had stipulated the independence of their territory, and the right of the inhabitants to choose their own form of government. They have annexed to the dominions of France, Piedmont, Parma, and Placentia, and the island of Elba, without allotting any provision to the king of Sardinia, whom they have deprived of the most valuable part of his territory, though they were bound by a solemn engagement to the emperor of Russia to attend to his interests, and to provide for his establishment. It may indeed with truth be asserted, that the period which has elapsed since the conclusion of the definitive treaty, has been marked with one continued series of aggression, violence, and insult, on the part of the French government."

With regard to Malta, the declaration proceeded to state, that when the French government demanded its evacuation, several articles of the treaty of Amiens respecting it remained unexecuted. The tenth article had stipulated, that the independence of the island should be placed under the guarantee and protection of Great Britain, France, Austria, Russia, Spain, and Prussia. The emperor of Germany had acceded to the guarantee, but only on condition of a like accession on the part of the other powers specified in the article. The emperor of Russia had refused his accession, except on the condition that the Maltese langue should be abrogated; and the king of Prussia had given no answer whatever to the application which had been made to him to accede to the arrangement. That the fundamental principle upon which depended the execution of the other parts of the article, had been defeated by the changes which had taken place in the constitution of the order since the conclusion of the treaty of peace. It was to the order of St John of Jerusalem, that his majesty was by the first stipulation of the tenth article bound to restore the island of Malta. The order is defined to consist of those langues which were in existence at the time of the conclusion of the treaty. The three French langues having been abolished, and a Maltese langue added to the institution, the order consisted therefore at that time of the following langues, viz. Arragon, Castile, Germany, Bavaria, and Russia. Since the conclusion of the definitive treaty, the langues of Arragon and Castile have been separated from the order by Spain, and part of the Italian langue had been abolished by the annexation of Piedmont and Parma to France. There is strong reason to believe, that it has been in contemplation to sequestrate the property of the Bavarian langue, and the intention has been avowed of keeping the Russian langue within the dominions of the emperor.

In the declaration, the French were accused of having instigated or accomplished the whole of those changes, and of thus having rendered it impossible to fulfil that part of the treaty. It was also remarked, that from a report published by an accredited agent of the French government, Colonel Sebastiani, it appeared that France entertained views hostile to the Turkish empire, the integrity of which had been expressly stipulated, which rendered the retention of Malta more necessary. The behaviour of the first consul to Lord Whitworth at his audience was also noticed, together with some other offensive occurrences; and it was observed that "His majesty might add to this list of indignities, the requisition which the French government have repeatedly urged, that the laws and constitution of this country should be changed, relative to the liberty of the press. His majesty might likewise add the calls which the French government have on several occasions made to violate the laws of hospitality, with respect to persons who had found an asylum within his dominions, and against whose conduct no charge whatever has at any time been substantiated. It is impossible to reflect on these different proceedings, and the course which the French government have thought proper to adopt respecting them, without the thorough conviction, that they are not the effect of accident, but that they form a part of a system, which has been adopted for the purpose of degrading, vilifying, and insulting his majesty and his government."

Administration were now placed in a very singular situation. Mr Fox opposed the war, and proposed that an attempt should be made to prevail with the emperor of Russia to mediate a peace; upon the supposition that, if his mediation was rejected by France, we might be able to secure an alliance with him. To this proposal administration acceded; but although Mr Fox opposed the war, almost the whole other members of the old opposition, including Mr Sheridan and Mr Tierney, strongly approved of it. Mr Pitt and the rest of the ex-ministry did the same. As Bonaparte had threatened to attempt an invasion, the parties out of power laid hold of this circumstance to excite alarm; they had industriously represented throughout the country, the present ministers, as men of moderate capacity, unfit to be intrusted with the defence of the empire in a perilous crisis. Mr Pitt and his colleagues, in their speeches in parliament, represented the nation as in danger of being instantly invaded by almost innumerable hosts of experienced troops, who could not be expected to delay more than a few days to land upon our shores. The members of the old opposition held precisely the same language; the views of both probably were in some degree to terrify the country, to call for their services, as men of greater energy than the present rulers. The militia, both ordinary and extraordinary, were called out, and a new body of troops was ordered to be raised by ballot, under the appellation of an army of reserve; at the same time, the raising of bodies of volunteers throughout the island was represented as absolutely necessary, and they were accordingly formed. An act of parliament was also passed, for calling out, in case of actual invasion, the whole male population of the kingdom, in classes according to their age, or their situation in life, as married or unmarried, or having children, &c. To support the expense of these different armaments, and of the augmentation of the navy, the income tax was restored with certain modifications.

Thus administration found their whole opponents, unlike any former opposition, striving with emulation to do their business for them, and to strengthen government by new armaments. The consequence was that during the ensuing autumn, ministers seemed to become perplexed by the multiplicity of business put into their hands, and to have entertained doubts about the propriety of some of the measures in which they had embarked. The plan of raising such numerous bodies of troops by ballot, while at the same time, substitution was permitted to those upon whom the ballot fell, became a most unequal mode of raising an army for the defence of the state, as it fell upon persons not according to their riches, but according to their age. It was attended with this effect, however, that as the bodies of volunteers raised by permission of government, enjoyed an exemption from certain ballots; this operated, along with the spirit of the country, as a sufficient premium to induce great multitudes of persons to enroll themselves for the purpose of acquiring the use of military exercise. Ministers at times hesitated to receive the numerous bodies of volunteers that offered themselves; but as they departed afterwards from this sentiment, nearly 400,000 men were trained to the use of arms, exclusive of the regular army, the militia, and the army of reserve. The ports of France, in the meanwhile, were closely blockaded, and their foreign possessions were seized; while the only step of retaliation in their power to exert, consisted of seizing the electorate of Hanover, which they plundered unmercifully. Bonaparte offered to give up Hanover as the price of Malta; but his offer was refused.

The most inconvenient circumstance to Great Britain, which was produced by the late political transactions, consisted of the great embarrassment occasioned to persons engaged in commerce, which was the cause of numerous bankruptcies.

Towards the close of the former war, trade had found out for itself regular channels, and in particular, the port of Hamburg had become the great thoroughfare of British merchandise, from which, as a neutral state, it was distributed among the countries engaged in the war. The conclusion of a treaty of peace produced the daily expectation of a renewal of the intercourse with France, and therefore put a stop to the circuitous trade by Hamburg. As nothing was substituted in the stead of the latter, a suspension of operations in some manufactures occurred. When these difficulties were coming to a close, the renewal of the war produced a new uncertainty about the channels in which the European trade must hereafter flow. The difficulty was increased by the invasion of Hanover by the French, and their excluding the British from the navigation of the Elbe, who in their turn blockaded the river with ships of war, and thus excluded all the world.

Parliament assembled on the 22d of November. In the speech from the throne, his majesty said: "Since I last met you in parliament, it has been my chief object to carry into effect those measures which your wisdom had adopted for the defence of the united kingdom, and for the vigorous prosecution of the war. In these preparations, I have been seconded by the voluntary exertions of all ranks of my people, in a manner that has, if possible, strengthened their claim to my confidence and affection. They have proved that the menaces of the enemy have only served to rouse their native and hereditary spirit; and that all other considerations are lost in a general disposition to make those efforts and sacrifices, which the honour and the safety of the kingdom demand at this important and critical conjuncture.

"Though my attention has principally been directed to the great object of internal security, no opportunity has been lost of making an impression on the foreign possessions of the enemy. The islands of St Lucia, Tobago, St Pierre, and Miquelon, and the settlements of Demerara and Essequibo, have surrendered to the British arms. In the conduct of the operations by which these valuable acquisitions have been made, the utmost promptitude and zeal have been displayed by the officers employed in those services, and by my forces acting under their command by sea and land. In Ireland, the leaders and several inferior agents in the late traitorous conspiracy, have been brought to justice, and the public tranquillity has experienced no further interruption. I indulge the hope that such of my deluded subjects as have swerved from their allegiance, are now convinced of their error; and that having compared the advantages they derived from the protection of a free constitution, with the condition of those countries which are under the dominion of the French government, they will cordially and zealously concur in resisting any attempt that may be made against the security and independence of my united kingdom."

The usual address to the throne was unanimously carried, though Mr Fox complained, that nothing had been said respecting the state of our negotiations with Russia.

As the debates in parliament during the present session were by no means very interesting, and as the war to which they alluded, is not brought to a termination, we shall avoid entering into a detail of them. During the winter, the French government continued to repeat with much confidence their threats of invasion, and the people of Great Britain remained in daily expectation that a landing would be attempted. Nothing however of any importance was done. Bonaparte travelled from Paris to the sea coast, and back to Paris, repeatedly. It was announced that a body of guides was formed to conduct the invading army, when it should have landed in England; and the whole generals and admirals, by whom the expedition was to be conducted, were said to have gone to their respective posts. Nothing actually occurred, however, excepting the failing from one French port to another, under the cover of land-batteries, of small parties of flat-bottomed boats. These at times evaded the vigilance of the British cruisers, though they were frequently also captured, or driven ashore, or sunk.

We are thus under the necessity of concluding the present article with leaving Britain still engaged in a war with its ancient enemy. As this war has been represented by our most conspicuous statesmen as of a most dangerous nature, and as having brought into the most serious hazard our existence as an independent state, it may not here be improper to take some notice of a subject which seems to be very defectively understood both in France and Britain; that is, the relative strength of the two countries.

The French nation consists of 25,000,000 of people, and their newly-acquired territories of four or five millions additional. They hold in a sort of vassalage, or dependence, all Europe to the south of the Rhine and the Adige. On the other hand, the population of Great Britain and Ireland amounts only to about 14,000,000, and, of these, a great part of the population of Ireland, may, in the present times, in consequence of their disaffection, be justly considered as a diminution from the strength of the empire, so that the effective population of Great Britain may perhaps be accounted as equal only to one half of that of France. The French are also considered as possessing this advantage in a military contest, that being chiefly an agricultural people, not depending for their support on trade or manufactures, the sources of their strength and riches are less injured by war than those of Great Britain. But the chief source of confidence on the part of France in a quarrel with Great Britain results from the strength of their numerous armies, composed of veteran soldiers, conducted by the most experienced and celebrated generals of the present age.

The French government has of late assumed a proud and menacing tone, as the stronger and more warlike party, and confidering themselves as in no danger from our hostility, threatened to subjugate the island by invading it with their numerous armies. By their threats they hoped to accomplish two objects: 1st, To embarrass the British government, and reduce the nation to great difficulties in supporting the ruinous expense attending great military and marine establishments, intended solely for defence; and, 2dly, The French in this way expect to acquire unlimited ascendancy upon the continent of Europe, by representing themselves as incomparably more powerful than Britain, which they are only prevented from reducing into slavery, by the ocean which surrounds it. The same considerations produce a considerable effect in Britain: much despondency is occasioned by reflecting on the expenses necessary for our safety against the present power of France; and much unhappiness, from an apprehension that the vigilance of our navy may be evaded by their armies, which we are apt to regard as almost irresistible, in consequence of the success they ultimately enjoyed during the late war.

It is apprehended that a more mature consideration of the subject would dispel the apprehensions of the British nation, and convince them, that at this moment they are very far from being inferior in strength to France, or have any reason to dread the result of a military contest with that power in any form in which it can possibly occur. It may be true, that France possesses a population of 26 millions; but it must be observed, that it is only a very small proportion of that population that can be employed in war; a sufficient number must remain at home to provide bread for the whole, and by their industry, to defray the enormous expense attending modern military operations, especially in offensive war. But the situation of the British nation is very different. The British islands, no doubt, contain a population less numerous than that of France; but the people of this country are not, like them, under the necessity of drawing their subsistence from the soil of their own country. The British islands only form the metropolis of a vast empire in distant regions. In the east, an industrious and civilized race of men, five times more numerous than the inhabitants of Britain, upon one of the most fertile portions of the globe, are subject to our dominion; and whatever can be spared from the fruits of their industry, is annually transported to Europe, and expended upon the subsistence, the defence, and the luxuries of the British nation. In the west, also, the industry of a different race of men is employed in producing the most valuable objects of necessity and luxury, and the profits of their labour centre in Great Britain. Hence it is, that the soil of our European territory is not employed in producing bread for the people, but in a great measure in supporting the animals that form the magnificent equipages of the rich, or in supplying butchers meat for a luxurious nation. Our country is in some measure converted, like ancient Italy in the time of the Romans, into gardens and pleasure grounds, while we procure grain from foreign countries.

It is in vain, therefore, that France possesses a superior European population. In the state of things now described, it is impossible for her to support the same number of European soldiers that Britain may do.

Every soldier France sends out, must be maintained, Britain, and clothed by the industry of Frenchmen, exerted upon a European soil, of far inferior fertility to that which is cherished by tropical rains, or the periodical floods of the Ganges. Whereas the British soldier is not supported merely by British industry, but by the industry of the natives of Hindoostan, or of the labourers of Jamaica. In this view, by curtailing in a moderate degree her luxury, Britain might convert an immense proportion of her population to military service, so as far to exceed any numbers, that during a length of time France could maintain in arms against her; for this simple reason, that almost every British subject may be said to be supported by the labour of eight or ten persons, in a more fertile country than that of France. In this respect, Britain resembles ancient Sparta. The citizens of that state were free, but each of them was a soldier, because he was supported by the industry of a subjugated race called Helots. What these last were to the Spartans, the Hindoos in the East, and the Africans transported to the West India islands, now are to the British nation.

It is also to be remarked, that the industry exerted in Britain is of a more profitable nature than that of France, in as much as manufacturing and commercial states always acquire greater riches than those employed in agriculture alone. We are, therefore, better able to support the expense of a protracted war, than the French can possibly be. Nor is any injury which they can do to our commerce an object of serious alarm. By refusing to trade with us, they only prevent themselves from acquiring wealth. All Asia and America are open to us, and no exertions of political power have hitherto been found able to exclude the British manufactures from the continent of Europe.

Even the engines of war, we possess in a superior degree to France. In consequence of the expertness of our artists, all kinds of instruments of destruction are here produced in greater abundance and with more facility; and our wealth has given us the command of the means of bringing into the field an innumerable cavalry, which could not fail instantly to embarrass an invading enemy, and by cutting off every means of communication or supply, ultimately to reduce them to ruin, with little loss or difficulty to ourselves. We are, indeed, accustomed greatly to overrate the evils attending invasion. It ought to be recollected, that our wealth by no means consists merely of what appears upon the surface of the British soil. It consists in a considerable degree of our distant possessions, which are protected by our navy; and all the damage that an invading enemy could commit, hemmed in, as he would be, by our cavalry, could not exceed a few millions sterling, which would prove no cause of embarrassment to the finances of Britain.

With regard to the military reputation of the present French armies, it may be remarked, that it is only of a recent date. In the year 1789, the French army was only the fourth in Europe. If it is now the first, this circumstance proves, that military skill is no inaccessible attainment. Well educated men are far more numerous in Great Britain than they ever were in France; and as their natural courage is not inferior, there seems no reason to doubt, that they might speedily Britain be enabled to excel their antagonists in the art of war, as much as they do in all other arts.

It seems, therefore, a false idea, that in a contest with France, Britain owes her safety merely to the ocean. Were Britain situated where Spain now is, without any other alteration of circumstance, there seems every reason to believe, that the British armies would speedily appear superior to the French. By riches drawn from distant countries, more numerous armies could at all times be maintained in the field; and as these armies would contain a far superior number of well educated and accomplished men, than would appear against them, they could not fail speedily to acquire superior skill, reputation, and success in war.

As matters actually stand, with a restless military government at the head of France, it is undoubtedly necessary for the British nation to be upon its guard, and to maintain itself in a state of constant preparation against that power. For this purpose, bodies of men voluntarily arming themselves, ought not to be entirely relied on. The whole youth of the British islands ought, at a certain age, to be regularly trained to military discipline. We should thus be in some measure converted into a military people, qualified at all times to protect, not merely our European islands, but the remote possessions of which we are the masters. In such a state, it might perhaps become a question with prudent politicians, how far we ought not to consider it as a necessary stipulation in any future treaty of peace, that France should acquire no territory out of Europe. Thus she would be prevented from obtaining a navy, and thus our foreign possessions would enable Britain permanently to retain her relative strength, notwithstanding the European conquests of France.

New BRITAIN, a large country of North America, called also Terra Labrador, has Hudson's bay and strait on the north and west, Canada and the river St Lawrence on the south, and the Atlantic ocean on the east. It is subject to Great Britain, but yields only skins and furs. The following is the best description of this country that hath yet appeared. It was drawn up by the commander of the Otter sloop, and communicated to the Royal Society, by the honourable Daines Barrington in 1774.

"There is no part of the British dominions so little known as the immense country of Labrador. So few have visited the northern parts of this vast country, that almost from the straits of Belleisle until you come to the entrance of Hudson's bay, for more than ten degrees of latitude, no chart which can give any tolerable idea of the coast hath been hitherto formed. The barrenness of the country explains why it has been so seldom frequented. Here avarice has but little to feed on.

Perhaps, without an immoderate share of vanity, I may venture to presume, that, as far as I have been, which is to the latitude of 59° 10', the draught which I have been able to form is by much the best of any that has hitherto been made.

Others have gone before me, blest with abilities superior to mine, and to whom I hope to be thought equal only in assiduity. But I had advantages of which they were destitute: with a small vessel, and having an Indian with me, who knew every rock and shoal upon the coast, I was enabled to be accurate in my observations; and these are the reasons why I deem my own sketch preferable to all others.

As this country is one of the most barren in the whole world, so its sea coast is the most remarkable. Bordered by innumerable islands, and many of them being a considerable distance from the main land, a ship of burden would sail a great way along the coast without being able to form any notion of its true situation.

Hence it is that all the charts of it have been so extremely erroneous; and hence arose those opinions that some of the inlets extended a vast distance into the country, if not quite into the sea of Hudson's bay.

Davis's inlet, which has been so much talked of, is not 20 leagues from the entrance of it to its extremity.

The navigation here is extremely hazardous. Towards the land, the sea is covered with large bodies and broken pieces of ice; and the farther you go northward, the greater is the quantity you meet with.

Some of those masses, which the seamen call islands of ice, are of a prodigious magnitude; and they are generally supposed to swim two-thirds under water. You will frequently see them more than 100 feet above the surface; and to ships in a storm, or in thick weather, nothing can be more terrible.

Those prodigious pieces of ice come from the north, and are supposed to be formed by the freezing of cataracts upon the lands about East Greenland and the pole. As soon as the severity of the winter begins to abate, their immense weight breaks them from the shore, and they are driven to the southward. To the miserable inhabitants of Labrador, their appearance upon the coast serves as a token of the approach of summer.

This vast tract of land is extremely barren, and altogether incapable of cultivation. The surface is everywhere uneven, and covered with large stones, some of which are of amazing dimensions. There are few springs; yet throughout the country there are prodigious chains of lakes or ponds, which are produced by the rains and the melting of the snow. These ponds abound in trout, but they are very small.

There is no such thing as level land. It is a country formed of frightful mountains, and unfruitful valleys. The mountains are almost devoid of every sort of herbage. A blighted shrub and little moss is sometimes to be seen upon them, but in general the bare rock is all you behold. The valleys are full of crooked low trees, such as the different pines, spruce, birch, and a species of cedar. Up some of the deep bays, and not far from the water, it is said, however, there are a few flicks of no inconsiderable size. In a word, the whole country is nothing more than a prodigious heap of barren rocks.

The climate is extremely rigorous. There is but little appearance of summer before the middle of July; and in September the approach of winter is very evident. It has been remarked, that the winters within these few years have been less severe than they have been known heretofore. The cause of such an alteration it would be difficult to discover.

All along the coast there are many rivers that empty empty themselves into the sea, and yet there are few of any consideration; and you must not imagine that the largest are any thing like what is generally understood by a river. Custom has taught us to give them this appellation; but the greatest part of them are nothing more than broad brooks or rivulets. As they are only drains from the ponds, in dry weather they are everywhere fordable; for running upon a solid rock, they become broad without having a bed of any depth below the surface of the banks.

"The superficial appearance of this country is extremely unfavourable. What may be hidden in its bowels, we cannot pretend to suggest: probably it may produce some copper; the rocks in many places being impregnated with an ore of that resemblance. Something of a horny substance, which is extremely transparent, and which will scale out into a number of small sheets, is often found amongst the stones; there are both black and white of this sort, but the black is the most rare. It has been tried in fire, but seems to be nowise affected by heat.

"The species of wood here are not very various: excepting a few shrubs which have as yet received no name from the Europeans, the principal produce of the country are the different sorts of spruce and pine. Of these, even in the more southern parts, there is not abundance; as you advance northwards they gradually diminish; and by the time you arrive at the 60th degree of latitude, the eye is not delighted with any sort of herbage. Here the wretched residents build their miserable habitations with the bones of whales. If ever they cheer their aching limbs with a fire, they gather a few sticks from the sea-shore, which have probably been washed from Norway or Lapland. Here a vast quantity of snow remains upon the land throughout the year.

"Although the winter here is so excessively rigid, in summer the heat is sometimes disagreeable; and in that season the weather is very moderate, and remarkably serene. It is but seldom foggy, speaking comparatively between this and Newfoundland; nor are you so frequently liable to those destructive gales of wind which visit many other parts of the globe.

"It is in general high land, and sometimes you meet with mountains of an astonishing height; you are also frequently presented with prospects that are really awful, and extremely romantic.

"The inhabitants of New Britain are called Eskimauks." See Greenland and Hudson's Bay.