which merits attention is the manner in 120,000 of which belong to persons who which the troops are to be furnished, keep only one horse of the kind, the rest which I think ought to be generally from to persons, some of whom keep ten and all parts of the kingdom, and that an ob- various other proportions. It certainly ligation be imposed upon those who are would not be a very severe regulation, balloted, either to serve in person or to when compared with the object to be acprovide a substitute: and the better to complished, to require one-tenth of these preserve the general proportion, that this horses for the public service. I would substitute be provided either from the therefore propose, that every person who parish in which the person balloted keeps ten horses, shall be obliged to furresides, or from a parish immediately ad- nish one horse and a horseman to serve in joining. It will be proper also to remove a corps of cavalry; that every person the present exemption from those who who keeps more than ten horses, and a have more than one child, on the express number falling short of twenty, after furcondition that they shall not be called nishing a horse and horseman for the first upon to serve out of the parish in which ten, shall subscribe a proportionate sum they live. The mode of training only for the rest, which shall be applied to deone-sixth part of the whole, twenty days fray the general expense; that those who in succession, as it will only withdraw ten keep twenty shall furnish two, three of thousand at a time from their usual occu- thirty, &c. and that those who keep fewer pations, will not much infringe upon the than ten shall form themselves into a general order of the community. Of class, when it shall be decided by ballot course they must be provided with some who, at the common expense, shall fursort of uniform, but it will be of the nish the horse and the horseman. These coarsest kind, and such as may be pur- troops thus raised will be provided with chased at a small expense. A sufficient uniforms and accoutrements, formed into number of arms will also be in readiness corps, and put under proper officers.for supplying each man in the moment of There is still another source which ought danger. Another measure which I would not to be neglected. Upon the supposisuggest to the committee is, to provide a tion of an invasion, it would be of no considerable force of irregular cavalry. small importance to form bodies of men, The regular cavalry on the present esta- who, from their dexterity in using fireblishment is certainly by no means incon- arms, might be highly useful in harassing siderable, and the yeomanry cavalry, the operations of the enemy. I allude to which from their numbers are sufficiently that description of men called gamerespectable, we have found to be highly keepers, and to others of the same class. useful in maintaining the internal tran- But I particularly allude to those instances quillity of the country. But with a view where gentlemen are gamekeepers for to repelling an invasion, the more this their own amusement, and not of necessity species of force is extended, the greater but of choice. In such cases, there can advantage is likely to accrue from it, as be no hardship in obliging those gentlean invading enemy, who must be desti- men, if we cannot have their personal tute of horses, can have no means to services, at least to find a substitute. I meet it upon equal terms. Besides, it is therefore propose, that those who shall a species of force which may be provided have taken out licences to shoot game, or in a mode that will be attended with al- deputations for game keepers, shall, withmost no expense to the public, and within a certain period, be at liberty to return little hardship to individuals. In order to calculate the extent to which these irregular cavalry may be raised, it is necessary to estimate the number of horses which are kept for pleasure throughout the kingdom, and by raising the levy in this proportion, it will fall upon those only who have a considerable stake to defend. By the produce of the tax, which is as good a criterion as any of the number of horses kept for pleasure, we fnd that, in Scotland, England, and Wales, they amount to about 200,000, the same if they think proper; but if, after that period, they shall continue their licences or deputations for gamekeepers, then they shall be obliged to find substitutes. I observe gentlemen smile at the idea of raising a force by such means, but that smile will be converted into surprise, when they hear that the number of persons who have taken out those licenses are no fewer than 7,000. The number of cavalry which I propose to raise in the manner I have mentioned will be 20,000. Thus have I pointed out the means by which I propose to raise 15,000 men, to be divided between the sea and the land service, to raise a supplemental levy of 60,000 for the militia; and to raise 20,000 men for the cavalry. I now move that the chairman be directed by the committee to move the House, "That leave be given to bring in a bill for raising a certain number of men in the several counties of England, and in the several counties, Stewartries, Royal Burghs, and towns, in that part of Great Britain called Scotland, for the service of his majesty's army and navy." Mr. Sheridan said:-I must confess, Sir, that I expected the right hon. gentleman would have accompanied his statement of defensive operations with some explanation of the reasons why it is necessary to take such measures at all. The plan, if put in execution, will impose additional burdens on the people, and such being its tendency, it was reasonable to expect that its necessity would have been evinced. If this House of Commons is not disposed to follow the example of the last parliament, to sacrifice the rights of the people to the regal prerogative, and to surrender with the blindness of implicit confidence the direction of public affairs to the ministers of the crown, I trust, as there are more new members in this than in any former parliament, that they will think it their duty to demand some farther information upon the subject, before they assent to a project so new and unprecedented. I wish to be informed whether ministers know any thing of what is passing in France, or whether any preparations have been making for such an attempt? If they are ignorant of this, the secret-service money voted by parliament must have been grossly misapplied. If they build their opinions upon such rant, as Dumourier's fixing the French flag upon the tower of London; if they are influenced by some idle speech or rhodomontade of any member of the two councils, I say that such speeches cannot be called a manifestation of an intention to invade us. Yet I wish to have it understood, that if any such intention is really entertained, I have not the slightest doubt that the event will be utter ruin and confusion to the enemy. Sir, if the enemy think that the country would not rise against them as one man; if they have any idea that they should be joined by any part of the inhabitants; if they suppose that they should not be overwhelmed by the mass that would be opposed to them, they and their ministers must be dupes indeed. Without detracting, however, from the ardour and spirit of any person, I must confess that I have not that military Quixotism, that chivalry of patriotism about me, as to wish, like some gentleman in the city, that 400,000 men might land merely that the courage of the country in defeating their attempts, might be made manifest. Sir, an invasion is not an event to be wished; but when I say, that it is not to be wished, I must be understood also to have no fear, no doubt, what the consequences would be if any such project were carried into execution. To the statements produced by the right hon. gentleman, I do not mean to object; but the House ought to know, that the belief of ministers of the danger of an invasion is well-founded. This is not the first time that the country has been alarmed with the idea. of an invasion. In a former war it was known that a large body of troops was collected on the French coasts under the command of, I believe, marshal Saxe. It was known, too, that the French ports were full of ships, calculated for the purpose of making a descent; this was some manifestation of an intention to invade the country. Have ministers information of similar preparations now? If they have, I must confide in their assurances. But if they consider the idle rant, and rhodomantade of any member of the legislature of France, as a sufficient manifestation of the project of an invasion, such grounds I consider as too light and unsubstantial to found upon them a measure of such importance as the present. The idea of invasion is by no means new. I will not disguise my opinion that this note of preparation is sounded for a purpose very different from that which has been this day professed. We have heard that the French armies have been completely defeated and even annihilated in Germany, and except, like the frogs in the marsh, who were afraid of being attacked by the conquered bull, ministers suppose that the French, after being routed by the emperor, are to come over and attack us, it is difficult to reconcile their present alarm with their other representations. But supposing the French really intend to invade us, what is the natural inference that they will draw from the resolutions which have been opened? Do they not proclaim to the enemy, that till the new force which it is proposed to collect and to train is brought into action, we are not in a proper state of defence, and thus point out the intermediate time, as the proper moment for making the attempt. But I am persuaded, that the plan now in agitation, points to a very different object, that it is in the contemplation of ministers to prolong the war, with the view of extending our possessions in the West Indies. I do not oppose the resolutions. I wish only to have some farther explanation, and to be informed whether the danger of an invasion is such as to require these measures of prevention. We are called upon to raise a great cavalry force for a very curious reason, because the enemy cannot easily import cavalry into the country. As well, supposing them to attack us only with cavalry, might it be said, that we ought only to have infantry to oppose to them. I have no objection to club for a horse, or to exercise in Hyde Park, and I dare say the right hon. gentleman is very well acquainted with the maxim of ride and tie. I confess, however, I cannot perceive the propriety of enlisting a corps of gamekeepers, as if a gamekeeper only had the heart to be a soldier. I am sure I know many gentlemen who are infinitely more expert shooters than their gamekeepers. Mr. Secretary Dundas said -The hon. gentleman wishes for some explanation from ministers, the effect of which demand, however, another part of his speech wholly supersedes. He calls for some information upon the subject of the invasion which has been announced by the enemy, in addition to what his majesty's speech contains, while at the same time he professes that he can place no confidence in their assurances. The hon. gentleman hopes, too, that the present parliament will not imitate the conduct pursued by that by which it was preceded. With regard to the present parliament, it must speak for itself. Those, however, who witnessed the public-spirited acts of the last parliament, must entertain the highest respect for it, and rank it with the most venerated parliaments this country had ever known. Ministers have stated, that a design has manifested itself in the enemy to invade this country; and I conceive they would have been wanting in their duty had they failed to call upon the force of the state to avert the danger or to disappoint the attempt. Whether the prepara tions that have been made will end in a descent upon this country it is impossible to decide. There are appearances of a disposition to make the attempt, which justify ministers in wishing to put the state in a posture of defence. Seeing what the enemy have already done, and the preparations they have made, it is prudent to adopt precautions. For my own part, I have no hesitation in giving it as my opinion, that upon these precautions it depends whether the projected invasion will be carried into execution. By showing that every thing has been done to secure our internal safety, we induce them to abandon a design which presents no hope of success. The hon. gentleman says, that military operations may be undertaken with the troops to be raised, of a nature entirely different from the avowed purpose. If ministers wished to undertake any military operations that were inconsistent with the interest of the nation, parliament had the power to check their designs. If the present negotiation should be unsuccessful, gentlemen cannot mean to say, that this country should be tied up froin offensive operations, and in the event of the prosecution of the war our defence at home, may depend upon the ability we possess to attack the enemy abroad. I think it therefore of essential importance to augment our regular force, for the defence of these kingdoms, and to carry on the military operations that circumstances may dictate, against an enemy that has evinced a disposition to destroy our commerce and to disturb our internal tranquillity. Mr. Fox said:-In this stage of the business it does not appear to me to be the duty of any man to make an opposition to the measure proposed; but even in this stage of it I have no difficulty in saying, that from the sense I have of the general plan, there are many parts of it, to the adoption of which no eloquence is likely to reconcile me. The right hon. gentleman observes, that at all events this country ought to make great preparations at home, and that if we should be under the necessity of going on with the war, these preparations may be beneficial to us in many respects. I object to the generality of this mode of speaking, because it conveys to us no specific information, and is likely, from being just in the abstract, to entrap some into an approbation of measures of dangerous consequence. That if we are led you already. Should this parliament be like the last (God in his mercy avert it!) this country will soon be in a condition, in which it will be of little importance, whether they have a parliament or not. But for the conduct of the last parliament we should not have heard of the measure which is now proposed to us. Ministers tell us, that the measure which they now propose is necessary to our safety. If it be so, it is their own conduct and the conduct of a confiding parliament, which has brought us into that situation. And what is the measure which they now propose? Why, it is, in its nature, a requisition; an imitation of the system of the French, against which so many vehement declamations have been pronounced: against the principle, applying it to a settled state, justly; but as against the French, in their condition, in my opinion, improperly, or at least in too unqualified a manner. Ministers now tell us, however, that our situation is such as to call for this measure. Granting it to be so for the sake of the argument only, I would then ask, what has brought us into that situation? To this I answer, the confidence, the criminal confidence, of the last parliament. One inevitable effect of that confidence of parliament in the minister has been the want of the confidence of the people in the integrity of parliament.-The right hon. secretary says, " it is good to be prepared." Certainly it is so; but when he comes to us, and makes this requisition, it is incumbent on him to show us the reason why we should be thus prepared. How stood the case in former periods of this war? In 1794, there was as much reason for such a measure as there is now; there was then as much of a rumour of an inva sion as there is now; and so the ministers told us at that time. The House, upon the faith of the ministers assertions, agreed to measures of the most unconstitutional nature, to avert, as it was suppos compelled to go on with the war, great preparations will be necessary, is a truth which nobody disputes; but it is a truth which conveys to us no information. It is applicable to this war, was applicable to the last, and will be applicable to every war. The right hon. gentleman should have applied his reasoning a little more closely; he should have come to the proposition which is now before the House. The question is this, is the proposition before us fit to be adopted under our present circumstances? If it be, then I say, that, for any evidence that appears before us, it was fit in 1756, was fit in 1778, was fit in 1794, and has always been fit in every period in which this country has been engaged in war. But, for the whole necessity of the measure, we have only the authority of the king's ministers, on which I do not choose to rely. The right hon. secretary has thought fit to pronounce a panegyric on the last parliament, and to recommend its conduct for the imitation of this. My opinion of the last parliament is, that it has done more mischief to the country than any that ever sat since parliaments were recognized in England; at least, since parliaments had any credit for attending to the interests of the people. Show me a parliament, in consequence of whose proceedings the people have been drained so much, and from which they have had so little benefit! Show me a parliament since the year 1688, the era of our Revolution, that has diminished the best and dearest rights of the people, so shamelessly, so wickedly, as the last parliament have done! Show me a parliament since that period that has so uniformly sacrificed the liberty of the subject to increase the influence of government, as the last parliament have done! To make it the subject of panegyric-to state its proceedings to be such as to be worthy of imitation-is beyond endurance Sir, I consider the last parliament to have been a curse to this country. The lead-ed, the impending danger. Such meaing principle on which they acted was that which leads directly to complete despotism-unlimited confidence in the ministers of the crown. Show me a parliament since the Revolution, that has given such a confidence, and look at the effect of such practice! This is the only war that has ever been conducted on the part of this country, in which there never has been one inquiry on the part of parliament. You see to what a state that has [VOI, XXXII.] sures, although unconstitutional, were ple of this country. Such was our state in 1794. What is it now, and what the difference between the two situations? Ministers now tell us, that an intention has been manifested on the part of the enemy to invade these kingdoms. I am too much accustomed to the artifice of ministers to receive any very deep impression from what they say. Did they not say formerly what they say now, that the enemy had some intention of invading this country? Certainly they did, and they were entrusted with force sufficient to prevent that calamity." But," says the right hon. gentleman, "I am of opinion, that, as it may be necessary for this country to carry on an offensive war, this measure may be of great advantage, inasmuch as we may thereby be the better able to avail ourselves of our forces." To this, as a general proposition, I do not object. But then I say to ministers, "Bring before us the facts on which you say this measure is necessary. What I object to is your duplicity. If you really want this force, and to the extent you say you do, show me the reason for it, and I will grant it cheerfully. But do not ask any thing to carry on the war abroad under the mask of defending us at home; for in that case you are asking under a false title what, under a real one, the people would not grant you; for I know they will grant to you to prevent an invasion at home, what they would refuse with indignation, if asked to carry on the war abroad."-But, Sir, it seems we are to have the responsibility of ministers for the due application of the grant which they now call for. Look at the extent to which the principle of voting such extraordinary measures as these, upon the idea of responsibility, may lead you. By it you will introduce a practice that must deprive the people of all their rights and all their property. If it should turn out (not an extravagant hypothesis), that all this story about an invasion is a mere pretence to gain the consent of the people to the measure now proposed, and that the real object is extremely different, what then will become of the boasted responsibility of ministers? How are we to make them responsible? We may say, and say truly, that "the event has proved there was no danger of an invasion when this measure was adopted." To which the ministers may answer, and be assured they will, True, there was no invasion, but then it was owing to the very measures which we proposed, and you adopted, that the invasion was prevented." How, then, are we to make ministers responsible for what they do under such a measure as this? The idea of responsibility in such a case is perfectly ridiculous. Why, Sir, at this rate you may go on and do every thing that the minister may ask you, until you have totally destroyed the constitution; the principles have already been too much invaded by the measures of the present ministers. There are some inconveniences that necessarily arise out of a free constitution. I know that many authors of great eminence have pointed out those inconveniencies. I do not deny it, although I have never seen them in so strong a light as the authors I allude to say they did; but the advantages resulting from a free constitution are so great, that I cannot patiently argue upon them, when they are put in the scale against the supposed advantages of a contrary form. Be that as it may in the opinion of others, I say, you cannot argue that subject in this House; for the people of this country have made their election: they have chosen a free government, and it is your duty to preserve it with all its inconveniences, if there be any that are worth mentioning. If, therefore, when ministers pretend an alarm, you are to give them whatever power they may ask for, when it is impossible you can attach any responsibility to them, as I have proved already in this case you cannot, why then you desert the point on which the people of the country have already made their election; and, instead of the blessings which your ancestors intended for you, you take what may appear to you, but what never appeared to me, the advantages of despotism. This would be a fraud upon the people of this country. I know the eloquence that has often been employed in attempting to show, by a flourishing antithesis, that we possess all the advantages of a free government and those of a despotic monarchy, by possessing the wisdom which arises from a free discussion of the representatives of the people, and the promptitude and dispatch of an unlimited monarchy. Such an antithesis may answer the purpose of an ingenious orator; but it can avail but little to any man who wishes for the safety of our constitution. I am of opinion, that our constitution, in its true spirit, cannot mix with any thing despotic. Have recourse to |