deductions he could make from it. To the fecond, he must obferve, that he did not for one, conceive himself committed by the addrefs, nor did (he was fatisfied) thofe gentlemen who gave Government the honour of their fupport, feel themselves fo far pledged, but that if the general opinion were totally adverse to the treaty, if any new information arose or any new argument of weight on the old information, they might alter their decifion-all the addrefs went to say was, that the Houfe had taken the treaty into their most serious confideration, and that so far they approved of it--not however, by any means furrendering or foregoing their right of future difcuffion, or even rejection on the first reading, on the fecond reading, on the commitment, on the reporting or engroffing, on the third reading, or finally, on the question, "that this bill do pafs;" and in this conftruction of the addrefs he felt himself fupported by a large and refpectable majority of the Houfe. The right honourable gentleman had argued, that in addition to the ordinary forms of a bill, every* act relative to matters of commerce, muft go through á Committee of the whole House, and be reported from that Committee. He had afferted that the bill was already pledged for, and the Houfe committed in, the firft, fecond, or third ftage -As to the Committee of the Houfe, he had already ftated his fentiments; and as to the number of ftages, fo wifely provided by our ancestors, the House would obferve, fo far from retrenching, he had, in fact, added two new and additional ftages; and these were the address and the report of that addrefs; fo that, inftead of weakening the conftitutional right of that House to full, frequent, and deliberative difcuffion, he had, in fact, to the utmost of his power, ftrengthened and maintained it. Thefe were the two great points that comprehended the whole of the right honourable gentleman's fpeech, as far as it immediately related to the question before them; and he owned that he fhould be tempted to ftop there, were it not that the right honourable gentleman had touched upon fome other matters, upon which he would detain the House but a very few moments with a word or two, by way. of obfervation. The right honourable gentleman had, by a ftrange fatality, a fatality which, could he fuppofe him capable of fuch weaknefs, he would almoft call a fuperftition, referred conftantly to the treaty of Utrecht, and seemed to imagine that as that treaty was, like the prefent, at first received favourably in the Houfe, fo might the prefent, in the end like that treaty, be demolished. He would just beg leave to ftate the hiftory of that treaty. It was not announced to that House, or to the nation, until the 9th of May 1713-on the 14th, the first reading of the bill, it was carried through the House by a large majority; but, the outcry of the nation becoming

1

becoming more and more ftrong against it, on the 19th of June following it was finally loft on the report. Did the conduct of the prefent Minifters bear any analogy to this?-In October laft, the commercial treaty with France was before the Public; from that time to this it had been before the Public, open and liable to difcuffion and objection. The ingenuity of the right honourable gentleman, and the industry of the refpectable gentlemen who furrounded him, had been exerted to prejudice the minds of the people, and conjure up objections against the treaty in vain. No objections had appeared during the courfe of five months-it was now March -did that look like a dread in Minifters that the treaty would not bear infpection, or, did it resemble a wish to take the House by furprife, and draw it into a premature pledge to the future bill, before they had time to examine its contents? The right honourable gentleman had faid, that the House, by pledging itfelf to the addrefs, had pledged itself to pafs certain future fpecific bills; and that His Majefty, in his answer, would probably exprefs his approbation of their intention, and that fuch a circumftance would be a direct infringement of the principles of our conftitution, in that the executive power thus interfered, and took cognizance of, and influenced the difcuffion of the House-to that affertion he must give an abfolute denial. What did the addrefs fay? It told His Majefty, that the House had received the treaty, which he had ordered to be laid before them; that they had examined, and, as far as they at prefent could judge, approved it, and were disposed to carry it into effect by certain laws. His Majefty might, in his anfwer, fay he was glad to find they approved it: What did that tell the Houfe? It conveyed His Majefty's approba tion of what? The very treaty which he had made himself, and recommended to their notice in his fpeech from the Throne at the beginning of the feffion. The right honourable gentleman might as well affert His Majefty's fpeech on opening the feffion to be a violation of the fpirit of the conftitution as much as the answer to the addrefs; for one was as much a mode of influencing the proceedings of the House and controlling the freedom of debate as the other. The right honourable gentleman had, with as much warmth as if it were introductory of an impeachment, challenged any man to produce an inftance of fuch an interpofition of the Crown. What would the right honourable gentleman fay, if inftances were produced, and that too in an era which even he would admit to be the best of all poffible times, as these were, in his opinion, the worft? Every man formed his own judgement as to which were the best and which the worst of times; and the expreffion of the worst of times might to him appear ra ther too fevere, were it not that the words admitted of fome

latitude

latitude of interpretation; and it was to be remembered, that the worst of times in the right honourable gentleman's interpretation meant those times in which he was under the mortifying neceffity of dividing with a minority. The precedents he meant to allude to, however, were in the best of times; upon recollection, he ought to beg pardon-not the best of all poffible times, but the best except one of all poffible times;― at the period when the right honourable gentleman was Secretary of State for the firft time, before he had extended his base and formed thofe connections which introduced the fecond aufpicious æra. It appeared on the Journals of the House, that, in the year 1782, in confequence of a meffage from His Majefty by Mr. Secretary Fox, the House paffed two refolutions, and addreffed the King relative to the jealoufy that fubfifted between this and the fifter kingdom, which resolutions and addrefs contained a promife of the repeal of the 6th of George the first; and on thofe refolutions, and that address,. and antecedent to the repeal of the positive statute, there had been a minifter found hardy enough not only to advise His Majefty to teftify his approbation of the intention of the Houfe, fignified in the faid refolutions, but which were not communicated to the Throne, but abfolutely, officially to communicate fuch intention through the channel of the Lord Lieutenant to the Parliament of Ireland, which in their addrefs in return, as appeared on their Journals, recognized and admitted fuch a declaration. Here was a clear, direct and manifect interpofition of the Crown, teftifying under the aufpices and by the advice of the right honourable gentleman to another legislature, the intention of the legiflature of this country; and this at a time when they had not teftified it themselves. After this, what became of the apprehenfion of the right honourable gentleman for the conftitution of the country, and the privileges of this Houfe? Upon the whole, what did the arguments go to prove? The right honourable gentleman had told the individual members of the Houle, that it was committed and concluded by their address, and therefore, he moved a refolution, ftating, that the House collectively was not committed and concluded; but as a great and a very refpectable majority, among which, he (Mr. Pitt) had the honour to be one, did not feel themselves tied down in the manner defcribed by the honourable gentleman, and therefore could not admit the neceffity of the motion; he would move, in order to negative the whole, to prefix the following words by way of amendment, viz. "That it is now neceffary to declare, &c.

66

Mr. Baflard obferved that the refolutions of 1782 were Mr. Bastard merely refolutions of their own, uncommunicated by them

to the Sovereign, and liable to be refcinded by subsequent re

VOL. XXI,

3 F

folutions,

Mr. Fox.

folutions, and that the precedents from the journals of the Irish Parliament could not be confidered as precedents for the guide and direction of that Houfe. He stated feveral arguments in fupport of the propriety of his opinion, and declared that he had voted for the commercial treaty, but as foon as he had heard the addrefs moved, he confidered it as pledging the House most unconftitutionally, and he voted against it.

Mr. Fox faid, that he thanked the right honourable gentleman for having put him in mind of the Irifh propositions, which he had accidentally paffed over before. The addrefs, in that cafe, he contended was in no fort fimilar to the addrefs lately voted. In the cafe of the lrith propofitions, the Parliament of England and Ireland were in the fituation of negociators, and the Crown was a fort of mediator between both. He hoped not to be deemed pedantic, when he used diplomatic allufions, but as they would beft exprefs his meaning, he would for once adopt them. He conceived the original Irish propofitions to be a project for a treaty on the part of Ireland, and those refolutions fent over by the Parliament of Great Britain might be deemed a counter-project for a treaty, the Crown being the medium of communication. The addrefs therefore, had neceffarily, in that cafe, been extremely different from the 'late addrefs. Indeed fo different as not to be in any fort capable of being drawn into comparison with it. That addrefs could go to nothing, fince the British Parliament could not ftir a ftep farther till they heard more from Ireland. Having explained the irrelevancy of the cafe of the addrefs to the Crown upon the Irish propofitions, Mr. Fox faid, that he would haften on to the other Irish precedent, that of 1782, relative to the repeal of the fixth of George the Firft; and here he could not help remarking, that, for the fake of enjoying the triumph of fome pleafantry at his expence, which, no doubt, the right honourable gentleman thought too good to lofe an opportunity of exhibiting, the right honourable gentleman had fixed an expreffion upon him which he had not used, by saying, that thefe were the worft of times. But, the right honourable gentleman by fuch means was enabled to purfue his play upon words, and to talk of precedents in the best of times, and the next best of times but one; an expreffion he had likewife never used. [The Chancellor of the Exchequer faid across the table, that was my mistake, and I ftated it to be fo.] Mr. Fox faid, Oh, then, the right honourable gentleman made a mistake on purpose to fix another pleasantry upon me. It matters not, let us proceed to the precedent. The refolutions of 1782 were never carried by an address to the Crown, but were merely refolutions of their own, which made a very effential difference in the nature of the two cafes. Indeed, to

give, the case of 1782 the smallest appearance of being a cafe in point, the right honourable gentleman had found it neceffary to abandon the Journals of the English House of Commons, and have recourfe to the Journals of the Irish House of Commons. Here he begged leave to object to that mode of obtaining precedents of what was to pafs or had paffed in the House, and he did fo rather for the fake of the Chair, because the Speaker had enough on his fhoulders already, without being obliged to load himself with all the precedents that the Journals of the Irish House of Commons would furnish. But, to return to the point, the right honourable gentleman had dwelt a good deal on the irregularity of a noble Duke (of Portland's) mode of treating for a new conftitution, and contended that what might be highly unwarrantable and unjuftifiable in a minifter under other circumftances, and when the conftitution of Ireland was fettled, was of a different complection as matters then ftood. The right honourable gentleman had pointed this part of his argument perfonally at him, forgetting in the first place that he had not, at any time, been very much in the habit of finding fault with that Adminiftration, and that a noble Marquis (for whom the right honourable gentleman used to profess strong fentiments of refpect and regard, however altered thofe fentiments might now be,) had an equal share in the measure with himself. He had no objection, however, to take the whole of the responsibility upon himself, and if the whole transaction had been to do over again, and he were asked if he would act the fame part and inftru&t the Lord Lieutenant in the fame manner, he would anfwer, he certainly would, under the fame circumstances; for, he confidered Ireland as then making out her declaration of rights, which was to form the bafis of the new conftitution fhe was treating for. He inftanced as a parallel cafe, the conduct of the convention of Parliament, while they were holding out their declaration of right as the terms of their treaty with the future Sovereigns, William and Mary.

Mr. Chancellor Pitt declared, that he was glad to hear Mr. Chanthat the right honourable gentleman was, at laft, willing to cellor Pitt. ftate the Irish propofitions, and the British refolutions upon them, as a project for a treaty and a counter project: with that defcription of the bufinefs he was perfectly contented, and hoped the right honourable gentleman would remember, that he was himself the author of that character of the bufinefs. He infifted upon it, that the cafe of 1782 was in point, and declared that the right honourable gentleman had been fo far from defending his own argument, that he had even been glad to defend a noble Marquis whom, on moft occafions, he had been eager to abuse and to attack, father than flick to his own defence. With regard to that

3 F 2

noble