more eligible to establish a precedent, than to put the judges to the task of a legal decifion on the measure in queftion. The confideration of the question on which it had been propofed to have taken the opinion of the judges, having been laid over to the 4th of February, the bufinefs was on that day refumed by the Earl of Abingdon, who made the two following motions, "Refolved, that it be the opinion of this House, that the giving or granting of money, as private aids, or benevolences, without the fanction of parliament, for the purpofe of railing armies for his Majefty's fervice, is against the fpirit of the conftitution, and the letter of the law." And," Refolved, that it be the opinion of this Houfe, that the obtaining of money by fubfcription, and under the direction of a committee of the fubfcribers, to be applied in railing of men for his Majesty's fervice, in fuch manner as his Majefty fhall think fit, is not only unconstitutional and illegal, but a direct infringement of the rights, and an abfolute breach of the privileges of par liament." The debates were long and warm, and exceedingly interefting, from the great difplay of legal and conftitutional knowledge which was exhibited; an amendment was moved early in the debate, by a noble Lord who was then high in office, but who is fince dead, and which went not only to the total overthrow of the original refolutions, but to the establishment of the very principle which they were intended to condemn. The intended amendment was, that after the words, " Refolved, that it is the opinion of this Houfe," the following fhould immediately fucceed, that voluntary fubfcriptions of money, to be applied towards completing the troops which his Majefty has ordered at this time to be levied for the public fervice, are contributions for legal purposes, made in a warrantable manner, and highly meritorious." This amendment being productive of much animadverfion, and condemned as unfair and unufual by the other fide, and not feeming to be approved of by fome Lords on the fame, was withdrawn; and the queftion being at length put, the original refolutions were rejected by a majo rity of juft three to one, the numbers being 90 to 30 who fup. ported the motion upon a divifion. CHAP. CHAP. VI. Various motions preparatory to the enquiry into the State of the nation. Duke of Grafton's motion for papers rejected. Mr. Fox and Colonel Barre's motions alfo rejected. Complaints on the refufal of papers, and of the defectiveness of those which were prefented. Avowed motives of the oppofition in the enquiry. Mr. Fox opens the enquiry in the grand committee of the Commons. Refolution moved and rejected. Mr. Burke's motions relative to the employment of the favages: rejected after long debates. Mr. Fox's motions in the committee, relative to the fate of the forces in America from the commencement of the war, and the loffes fuftained on that fervice, rejected, after much debate. Debate on the appointment of a Chairman, on opening the committee of the Lords. Lord Scarfdale voted to the chair, on a divifion. Debates on the Duke of Richmond's motion against fending any part of the old eftablished home military force on diftant fervice. Motion rejected. Merchants give evidence at the bar, of the great laffes fuftained by commerce in the courfe of the war. Counter evidence, intended to fhew the national advantages derived from the war. Several refolutions moved by the Duke of Richmond, founded on the facts flated in the evidence of the Merchants. Refolutions fet afide, after much debate, by the previous queftion. HE critical fituation of afmeftic, naturally directed the public attention to the opening of the committee on the ftate of the nation; whilst hope and anxiety were kept equally awake to the refult of that enquiry. As the time approached, frequent motions were made by the leaders of oppofition in both Houses, for the various fpecies of information which they deemed neceffary towards elucidating the different fubjects which they propofed as objects of future difcuffion, and the fupport of those points which they wifhed to eftablish. In fome inftances these motions were complied with, and in others rejected. We have already touched upon the circumstances which tended to a change of difpofition in ton, on the 27th of January, fell within the latter predicament. This motion was for "a copy of the anfwer fent to the commissioners for reftoring peace to his Majefty's colonies in America, in confequence of their letter to Lord George Germaine, dated the 30th of November, 1776, excepting fuch part of faid anfwer as might affect the fafety of any individual." It was oppofed by the minifters on the fame general grounds which were taken by thofe in the House of Commons, previous to the recefs, for the refufal of all papers that might tend to the disclosure of any negociation between the commiffioners and the Americans, pending the fuppofed existence of fuch negociation. An uncertain [G] 3 limita limitation of time, but capable of including the duration of the powers granted to the commiffioners. On the other fide a new ground of argument was afforded, from the letter which produced the anfwer in queftion being already before the Houfe; fo that the one feemed a neceffary appendage to the other. It alfo appeared by the letter in hand, that the commiffioners were not only doubtful as to the extent of their own powers, but that they were in a fill greater ftate of uncertainty, with refpect to the propriety of exercifing thofe which they knew they poffeffed; and that upon thefe accounts they had flated their difficulties, and written to adminiftration for inftructions. Upon this ground the oppofition contended, that the conduct of the minifters in the inftructions which they then gave, must have confequently determined the event of the fubfequent meafures purfaed by the commiffioners. If that conduct, faid they, was wife, prudent, and expedient, as we fuppofe it was, they can have no reafonable objection to fubmit it, any more than the motives upo.. which they acted, to the confideration of the Houfe; but if this is refufed, it will then certainly be equally fair in argument, and confonant with reafon, to prefume, that being confcious of their own mifconduct, and afraid of its being expofed, they avail themfelves of their prefent influence to to fcreen it from the knowledge of the public. To this, and much more, which was advanced on that fide, the inexpediency of difclofure was the conclufive reply, and afforded an inexpugnable line of defence on the other. The Lords in office, however, at the fame time, totally difclaiming all defire or intention of withholding any information which could with propriety be communicated; and afferting, that the paper in question, if it had been produced, would not have anfwered any of the purpofes for which it was fo eagerly demanded. Indeed, the noble Lords feemed to be frangers in fo extraordinary a degree to the paper now demanded, and to vary fo much in their ideas of its nature and contents, that this fingular circumftance afforded an opportunity for a charge which was ftrongly urged on the other fide, that no fuch paper either did now or ever exift; that no anfwer or inftructions had been fent to the Commiffioners; but that in this, as in other cafes of the greateft national importance, the public bufinefs had been totally neglected. After confiderable debates the motion was rejected without a di- . vifion. A motion made on the fame day in the other Houfe by Mr. Fox, met with a fimilar fate, being dif pofed of by the previous queftion without a divifion. That motion was in part, upon the fame ground with one made in the other Houfe, by the Earl of Chatham, 'before the recefs, being a requifition of copies of the inftructions given to General Burgoyne, together with fuch parts of Sir William Howe's inftructions, as tended to any cooperation with the northern army. It was oppofed upon the ground of impropriety and unfairness with refpect to the abfent General, who fhould in juftice be prefent to explain and defend his conduct, when whenever any fuch enquiry was inftituted. The minifters had no objection, they faid, to any fcrutiny that related merely to themfelves; but in this bufinefs, befides the juftice due to the abfent, they were themfelves particularly affected in point of delicacy; for they found that many gentlemen understood a paffage in the Gene ral's letter, as acknowledging, in fome degree, fault or error on one fide or other, and as feeming to bring the matter to an iffue, whether it lay with himself or with the minifters; fo that in thefe peculiar circumftances it was impoffible for them to agree to any enquiry into the fubject until he was prefent. at On the other fide, the oppofition diftinguished between general enquiry, and particular charge or accufation; the motion, they faid, neither led to or fuppofed any charge or accufation, either against the General, or against the minifters; it only required the knowledge of inftructions, which the Houfe muft at fome time be in poffeffion of, and which was prefent particularly neceffary for the directing of its judgment, in the forming a true eftimate of the progrefs and state of the American war, and being thereby enabled to determine upon the most prudent and feafible meafures for the restoration of the public tranquillity. And that the infpection of these inftructions could no more preclude a future enquiry into the conduct, than it could establish the juftification of any of the parties concerned. However thefe matters might be, the motion was thought ill timed; and the refufal of mi niftry to lay these papers before the Houfe was generally juftified. This motion being difpofed of in the manner we have mentioned, Colonel Barre moved, that "copies of all letters and extracts of letters, which had paffed between General Gage, Lord Howe, Sir William Howe, and General Carle. ton, from the 1ft of July, 1775, to the 27th of January, 1778, fhould be laid before the Houfe." Colonel Barre made alfo two other motions on the 29th of January, requiring accounts of the ftate of the artillery, &c. in ftore in America, at the commencement of the year 1774, and of the quantity fince fhipped for that continent. The two firft of these motions were fupported on the certainty, that tranfactions fo long paffed could have no effect on any prefent operations. The laft was par ticularly grounded on the vaft charge of the artillery beyond the example of any former war. The first and laft were both, however, overruled on the fame principle,— the dread of giving information to the enemy. The complaints made in both Houfes, by the oppofition, for the rejection of papers were not greater than thofe which they continually repeated, of the failure of delivery with refpect to thofe already ordered, and the exceeding defectivenefs, erroneoufnefs, and unfatisfactoriness of those which were prefented; and which they stated as being totally incompetent to the purpofes for which they had been ordered; and as fhewing rather a mockery of the authority of parliament, than a due compliance with its refolutions. The minifters replied, that when gentlemen moved for papers, they frequently did not fee or confider the extent to which their motions went. That contracts for cloathing, victualling, and fupplying the troops with rum, porter, and the various other articles neceffary for the fervice, together with the treafury minutes relative to all fuch contracts for four entire years, had been demanded. That these were fo exceedingly voluminous, that it required more time than the minif ters themfelves could have apprehended, to obey the order of parliament. That they did not wish to evade the enquiry; it was their fincere defire to comply, as ftrictly as poffible, with the orders of parliament, But that they neither did, nor fhould, confider themselves refponfible for any Incorrectness that might appear in the accounts. They denied that any information was defignedly withheld. No doubt could be entertained, but that the different offices prefented fuch materials as they were poffeffed of, fo far as they had been included in the orders which they received. It might happen in fome cafes, that the accounts which were demanded had not been received. In others, perhaps, the original motions had not been directed to the proper offices. But these were not matters that lay with them. The complaints on the other fide, however, continued to the laft; nor did they acknowledge that the caufe was ever entirely remedied. Some accounts, they faid, were deficient, others imperfect, and fome totally omitted. Refponfibility was shifted one mo ment, and official knowledge the next. Those who, under the immediate authority of parliament, endeavoured to procure information for its guidance, in matters of the greatest national importance, were wearied and baffled by chicane and evafion. It was not this, or it was not that person's bufinels to give information; or the papers did not belong to this or to that office, was the fatisfaction they received; and thus they were left to grope their way through a chaos of uncertainty and error. It was the bufinefs of minifters, they faid, and would have been their practice, if they had relied on the rectitude of their conduct, or the wifdom of their measures, to have procured, without giving any trouble to the other fide, every fpecies of information that could be wanted, in order to their own exculpation, and thereby to eftablish a perpetual record of their innocence and ability. Before we enter into any detail of the subject, it may not be entirely unneceffary to take a fhort view of the avowed motives of the oppofition in this enquiry; including, alfo, the objects which they wifhed to eftablish thereby, and the conclufions to draw therefrom. The grand motive of the whole enquiry was the establishment, as an incontrovertible fact, of not only the expediency, but the abfolute neceffity, of bringing the American war to the fpeedieft poffible conclufion;-of restoring harmony upon a broad, and confequently equitable bottom, between the mother country and her colonies;— and the establishment of a permanent union at any rate, but itill upon |