We had, he obferved, the enor mous eftablishment of 220,000 men, of which there was a motley force of fourteen or fifteen freies of troops. He confidered the fencible cavalry as retained to over-awe the people of this country." The regiments of this defcription were more profitable than had been allowed, all the off reckonings being pocketed by the commanders. On an average, every man' enlifted within these two years had, at the leaft, coft government 661. In addition to this, the army was fo ruined, that it would be impoffible, in ten or fifteen years, to bring it back to the ftate in which the minifter had found it. General Tarleton afferted, that, fo far from the cavalry being lefs numerous than on former occafions, as had been affirmed, there were not, even during the rebellions of this country, an equal number. He ftrongly reprobated the levity of phrafeology made ufe of by the fecretary at war refpecting the fate of the unfortunate emigrants. In addition to the other arguments against maintaining fo large a body of fencible cavalry, he mentioned the immoderate quantity of fodder, &c. that would be confumed; and that it would involve the nation in an expence of 700,000l. He took a progreffive view of the army expenditure from 1792, when it amounted to 1,814,000l. to the prefent year, when it was increased to 11,470,000l. The ordnance in 1793 was 448,000l. and at prefent 1,913,000l. fo that the army, for the prefent year, would coft the country 13,383,000l. The general pointedly animadverted upon the mifmanagement and neglect of minifters, and particularly blamed the delay in fending out the WeftIndia fleet- the ftate of inactivity in which our troops were kept on' the continent, merely as a guard to Hanover, which ought to contribute to the expence of troops defending her own territories--and the unfortunate expedition to the coaft of France, which was illtimed, and the commander, M. de Puiffave, neither a man of character' nor of military talents. By this expedition a British fleet was kept uselefs, which if employed for the protection of the Mediterranean, the fevere lofs lately fustained in that quarter might have been prevented. Mr. Windham exculpated himfelf from any intentional levity in the phrafe "killed off", so much cenfured by fome of the members. Mr. Sergent, lord Belgrave, and Mr. Dundas, entered into a juftifi cation of the conduct of ministers, particularly of the duke of Richmond refpecting the ordnance. The latter ftrongly controverted the pofitions that had been advanced refpecting the Weft-India fleet. That it ought to have failed in October, he readily admitted; and in fact part was ready by the 10th of that month, and the remainder by November. The failure of its failing was then owing to the wind. Mr. Grey ftrongly noticed the impropriety of the whole fleet not having been ready to fail, not merely by the 10th of October, but fo as to have cleared the Channel by the 20th of September. The neceflity of fending out a great armament to the Weft Indies must, he obferved, have been known to minifters as long fince as laft June twelvemonths, when an account of the recapture of Guadaloupe was received. Before the charge of neglect could be removed from minifters, they must prove that the fleet was ready to fail before that feafon when ftorms and tempefts 8 gene generally prevailed. From comparing the reduction of the army which had been ftated, and the eftimates of the prefent and preceding year, he contended that a faving of 350,000l. ought to have been deducted. The provifion for the ftaff, amounting to 103,6421. was, he faid, unparalleled and enormous; and this he proved from the fratement of fums required for this purpose under the adminiftration of lord Chatham and during the American war, which had been reprobated for its extravagance, but which fell infinitely fhort of the prefent fum. Mr. Fox thought minifters, in juftification of themfelves, ought to call for an inquiry. The affertion, that the fleet was ready to fail by the ift of November, could not, he averred, be made good upon an inquiry. He cenfured the first expedition to France, as wild and chimerical; on this expedition, however, he confeffed there was fome room for difference of opinion; but the fecond was planned and executed in contempt of the experience to be collected and learned from the former. In the prefent feafon of fcarcity, he ftrongly objected to maintaining fo large a body of cavalry, but thought it fhameful, when the country was in no danger of invafion, to keep up fo alarming and unprecedented an army in the kingdom, under pretence of the prefervation of domeftic peace; he observed, the civil power had always been fufficient. He arraigned in ftrong terms the commencement and conduct of the war; which, as ufual, was as ftrongly defended by Mr. Pitt, who farther affigned, as a reason why the estimates of the prefent year were calculated upon the fame fcale as thofe of the preceding year, though that exceeded the expence, that "laft year there was a confiderable number of noneffectives," and therefore a faving of pay; but that this year there would no fuch deficiency be found in the reduced establishment. He endeavoured to juftify the increased expences of the ftaff; he mentioned the increafe in the militia, the fencible and the yeomanry corps, and the advantages refulting from fuperior difcipline. He warmly controverted the opinion, that Great Britain had for the last twelvemonth prevented a general peace from taking place. Mr. Fox, on the contrary, in reply, ftated it as a propofition which he could prove and establish as completely as any political propofition could reafonably be proved and established. recommitment was negatived; and the refolutions, after being read a fecond time, were agreed to. The Upon the report being brought up, a difcuffion again took place refpecting the Weft India expedition. Mr. Grey remarked that the armament was fo far from being ready at the time mentioned by minifters (though they had contended, that, in order to make an impreffion, it should act together), that the contingent from Ireland was not yet ready. The troops from that kingdom had, he afferted, been long encamped on Spice Ifland in the cove of Cork, where, from the dampnefs of the fituation. and the detention, they had loft many men by disease, and had then 1200 fick in the hofpital. On the 28th November, they had not tranfports fufficient for their embarkation, by 3000 tons. A ftill further difcuffion took place`refpecting the charge for the erection of barracks. The expence and unconftitutional tendency of this measure were very forcibly expofed by by Mr. M. A. Taylor, Mr. Courtenay, Mr. Whitbread, Mr. Sheridan, Mr. Fox, Mr. W. Smith, and Mr. Martin; and the measure was fupported by Mr. Windham, Mr. Pitt, and Mr. Dundas. In the progrefs of this debate, Mr. Whitbread moved for amending the refolution, by omitting the fum expended for the erection of barracks; which was negatived by a divifion of 7 againft 28. The whole of the debate ended by two motions from Mr. Grey and Mr. Sheridan, for papers relating to the expences of the officering of barracks; which were ordered. The papers thus moved for Dec. 4, were not, however, brought forward till the 7th of March. On the 8th of April general Smith moved for a committee to inquire into the amount of the expenditure in erecting barracks, to investigate the authority for this application of the public money, and to report the evidence, with their opinion, to the houfe. The general prefaced this motion by a fpeech, in which he ftated the expence of barracks at nearly £1,400,000. The increafed patronage to minifters was, he faid, the appointment of 46 barrackmafters, a barrack-mafter general, and nineteen officers, with falaries amounting to .11,000. The general pointed out inftances where "the barrack-masters had entered upon pay even before the erection of the barracks, perhaps even before they were intended." This, he contended, was unconftitutional, and a grofs infringement of Mr. Burke's bill. The barracks already erceted were, he faid, capable of containing 34,000 troops, which was double the number of the ufual peace establishment. Was this a needlefs fquandering of the public money? or was it to main tain a standing army, fufficient (to ufe one of their own expreffions) to enable minifters to exercife a rigour beyond the law? The fecretary at war allowed the expence to be very great, but thought the only queftion was, whether there was a comparative proportion between the magnitude of the expenditure and the importance of the object. In point of form, he allowed there had been a departure; but no public inconvenience arofe from it. The queftion, though it had not come regularly before the house, had come in other forms. The amount of the expence of erecting barracks could not, he said, have been previoufly afcertained. He strongly infifted upon the hardships from which innkeepers, &c. would be relieved by the erection of barracks, who, in fact, had no more right to be thus burthened than any other defcription of people. When this practice of billeting firft obtained ground, there was more proportion between the pay of the foldiers and the price of every neceffary of life; and therefore the foldier was better able to pay for his fare. The neceffity of getting inns for the foldiers often made their route more troublesome and circuitous, and was confequently a further reason for the erection of barracks. From this confideration, and the allowance which it had been found neceffary to make to innkeepers, he contended that barracks would be confiderably cheaper in time of war, and, he believed, alfo in time of peace. In the event of a peace, it was by no means neceffary to fill them with troops. On a general principle of defence, it might be neceffary to quarter troops where there were no inns; but, without fuch a precaution as the one then under under confideration, fome parts of the kingdom, fuch as the towns upon the east of Scotland, might be liable to the depredations of any privateer. The accommodation above the peace eftablishment, which he stated at 3700 men, would only allow for the furplus of 1700, which were furely not fufficient to excite alarm. The new iyftem was, he contended, greatly fuperior in point of economy to the old; the new expences included a part of the expences formerly placed to the account of ordnance; a part likewife went to the governors of forts and garrifons. With refpect to the appointment of a barrackmafter previous to building the barracks, it was neceffary to have a mafter to treat for the ground, and overfee the progrefs of erection. He ftated further, that much trouble and little emolument was at tached to thofe offices, and that, therefore, gentlemen were continually refigning them. The erection of barracks was, he thought, further juftifiable from the prevalence of fedition, which rendered it neceffary to remove the foldiery from the danger of contamination: it would at once increase the comforts and the obedience of the foldiery. After an elaborate vindication of the expreffion alluded to in the fpeech of the preceding fpeaker, Mr. Windham, as might be expect ed, gave a direct negative to the motion. Mr. M. A. Taylor obferved that it had been infinuated, that feditious papers had been thrown into the quarters of the foldiers, in order to corrupt them; and therefore barracks were neceffary. But why might not these papers be thrown into the barracks? and why were not persons thus acting fubjected to the puniments provided by law? Could barracks, however, fecure the foldiery from those pernicious attacks? Did they never go abroad, and fhare with their fellowcitizens the bleffings and contagion of fociety?-Automaton troops of fuch difcipline might do for drill, but the beft fupport of government, and the braveft defenders of the rights, liberties, religion, and property, of the kingdom, were those who had an intereft in all, and partook of the comforts they afford. Having formerly declared his fentiments refpecting the expediency and advantages of uniting the characters of the foldier and citizen, he would at prefent decline that fubject; but he was certain, had Lord North, in the American war, propofed fuch a fyftem, the present minifter would have been one of the moft ftrenuous opponents of a measure which he would not have hefitated to deem eminently weak and extravagant. He proceeded to notice the vaft extenfion of patronage, and pointedly ridiculed the appointment of a barrack-mafter at Lincoln, who, though he could not plead having feen military fervice, and though thefe offices were held forth by the fecretary at war as rewards for men who deferved well from their country, yet certainly poffeffed uncommon abilities, and was at once a good faddler, a good fportfman, a good dancing-mafter, and, at the fame time, mafter of the ceremonies at the Lincoln affembly! The improbability of placing the foldiery in fuch a fituation as to prevent their listening to the voice of fedition, without fhutting them out from the principles of rational liberty, was forcibly ftated by Mr. Fox. God forbid that they should be taught difobedience! But was it not a plain propofition, that indif criminate all the expence had been incurred ≥ Mr. Fox proceeded to notice an inconfiftency which had appeared in the doctrines laid down that evening. Barracks were faid to have been erected upon the fpur of the occafion: this was the excufe for their erection; but yet it is affert criminate obedience was not the duty of an Englishman, whether foldier or citizen? If one fyftem was more corrupt and inimical to freedom than another, it was the fyftem of barracks. The cantonment in barracks of the army of France was, he pointedly obferved, one principal caufe of the revo-ed that it has been long a matter lution. To fpeak in terms of reprobation of thofe who held doctrines hoftile to the conftitution, was a farce, while minifters were continually paffing acts fubverfive of its acknowledged principles. Their manifeft breach of the appropriation act must be fresh in every one's recollection. Thefe deviations were juftified on the plea of neceflity: fome deviation from ftrict form was confefled; but nothing, it was faid, had been done fubftantially prejudicial. This was the language of him who had a fanctified horror at every thing which wore the femblance of reform, of him who trembled at the bare idea of making one step towards innovation; yet he was the perfon who came forward to say that forms might be difpenfed with. But what was this form to be difpenfed with? Was it not to difpenfe with a fundamental principle of the conftitution? Was the houfe not called upon to difpenfe with that controul which it ought to have over the public treafure, and th fanction expences to which it had never agreed? The conftitution afferted that money was not to be levied without the confent of parliament. Had not that been done in the prefent inftance? When the queftion of barracks was under the contemplation of government, fhould it not have been folemnly fubmitted to parliament, and maturely confidered, and not brought before them for approbation after of experience, that the military could not be properly accommodated in any other way. The plan, he contended, had been long in agitation, though minifters had not thought proper to bring it regularly before the house. It was triumphantly faid that our ancestors gave their occafional confent to fuch a measure; but was there any refemblance between fmall cantonments partially taking place, and the feclufion of the whole army from the rest of their countrymen? -When this fubject had been brought before the house fome time ago, minifters got rid of it by the order of the day. Could this be called a folemn decifion of parliament? That decifion gave no countenance whatever to the unauthorifed expenditure of the public money. Many of the barrackmafters were, he contended, felected merely for election purposes. Should the appointment of a committee of inquiry be refifted, however, Mr. Fox faid, though he might expofe himfelf to invidious obfervations, he would fay that we had but the mockery of a conftitution. If, indeed, ministers difregarded all fundamental principles-if the house quietly tolerated their exceffes-if the power of raifing and applying money was exercifed, not by the houfe of commons, but by minifters, what was the conftitution but a farce and mockery? The maintaining of a ftanding army in the country, and |