to Scotland. He detested all general im- | gentleman, who was a colonel in the serputations-all marked partialities-all de- vice. Their offers were as noble and adtermined proscriptions. They were dan- vantageous; for they only desired the gerous and fatal. We ought to be united continuance of their own rank. in heart and affection as well as in interest, and to have but one common undivided claim to favour. He would be as great an enemy to an Irish partiality, to a Southern partiality, as he was to a Scotch partiality. In the infancy of their union with this country there was cause for partiality and favour, since the principal men, by feeling the advantages of a well regulated and a free government, would tend to conciliate the affections of the whole. But must they be always in their infancy? Must they still be fed and nourished to keep them quiet and reconciled? It was the marked partiality which he condemned, not the country. He paid them high compliments, as an ingenious and an enterprising people. As to the particular regiment, raised so unaccountably and so contrary to the rules of the service, he must give his vote against it, and he wished to go into the committee on purpose. The question for going into the committee now passed, and the Speaker left the chair. The expence of Mr. Fullarton's corps was 8,6231. Mr. T. Townshend rose to oppose the vote for Mr. Fullarton's corps, from the firmest opinion of its being contrary to every rule and regulation of the service. He had no prejudice to any part of this country he thought the Scotch were very able officers, and that their zeal and enterprize did them honour. But he could not support so evident and marked a partiality as appeared in favour of that country in the present reign. He thought English officers just as good as Scotch; he thought Scotch officers just as good as English. Several offers had been made equally spirited and advantageous with those of Mr. Fullarton and major Humberston, and when he saw a colonel Meadows and a colonel Musgrave unemployed, he could not be patient when such appointments were made. He would be bold to say, that in the new-raised corps, there were four or five Scotch officers for one English. The Yorkshire Rangers were all officered by Scotch; and major Stanhope, who had a natural interest in the county of Derby, had been refused a regiment. Mr. Duburgh, a gentleman of family in Ireland, was also refused permission to raise a corps. Lord Ross, who was a major general, was refused; and another Mr. Fox said, that of all men breathing, no one entertained fewer prejudices than himself. He detested them. He had many valuable friends in Scotland, and he had the pleasure to say that many noble persons in that country went hand in hand with England on the present occasion. He wished, for his part, to unite every part of the empire, and to lose, if possible, the very names of distinction. It had been the system of this unfortunate reign to maintain itself by division and discord. Divide et impera had been its favourite plan. It had accomplished the divide, but the impera he hoped would never follow. Ireland had been divided from England, England from Scotland, and America from Great Britain. This system of division and discord had set brother against brother, man against man, and connexion against connexion. He wished to see that system superseded by one of family concord, which had an eye to every part of the empire, and proscribed nothing but inability and demerit. The question being put upon the sum for Mr. Fullarton's corps, the committer divided: Yeas 102; Noes 66. Debate on Mr. Dunning's Motions res pecting the Influence of the_Crown-an the Abuses in the Public Expenditure. April 6. The House, according to order, resolved itself into a committee of the whole House, to consider of the Petition of the gentlemen, clergy, and freeholders of the county of York, respecting an Economical Reform, and also the several other petitions referred to the consideration of the said committee. The titles the said petitions being read, in all ab forty in number, Mr. Dunning rose, and said, it was necessary to observe that the subj matter to be taken into consideration, w the subject matter contained in the pe tions. Independent of the great obje which the petitions recommended to t care and attention of parliament, whi had been according to the particular ide of the several classes of petitioners of various nature, there was one great fund mental point on which they hinged, t of setting limits or paring down the creased, dangerous, and alarming influer of the crown, and an œconomical exper d C diture of the public money. In one point of view, both these objects might be fairly consolidated into one great principle. For instance, if the public money was faithfully applied, and frugally expended, that would reduce the influence of the crown; if, on the other hand, the influence of the crown was restrained within its natural and constitutional limits, it would once more restore that power which the constitution had vested in that House, the enquiring into and controuling the expenditure of public money; but nevertheless, though the principle embraced one great object, a necessity arose, that the principle should be divided; that is, the remedy should, in pursuance of the objects held forth and recommended in the petitions, be directed to two points. Before he proceeded any further, therefore, he should take it for granted, because the fact stood so stated in the petitions on the table, that a reform of the public expenditure, and limiting and restraining the increasing influence of the crown, were the two great objects which must draw the attention of that House, and necessarily force those two important subjects into discussion. These being the evils set forth in the petitions, it was his duty, however unequal he might be to the task he had undertaken, to apply what he deemed specific and distinct remedies to them both; that was, to propose some remedy, or frame some resolution, which would serve as a basis, on which he might afterwards erect a system of measures, to answer the purpose, and comply with the wishes of the petitioners. Before he proceeded any further, it would be necessary for him to state and remind the House of what had been done, as it was supposed, in consequence of the petitions now on the table, and how far those attempts had or had not succeeded; because such an enquiry would partly point out the resistance already made and avowed to the great objects of the petitions; and would have this important effect; it would shew, that no redress could be, or was meant to be given to the petitioners, by the modes already tried; and at the same time prove precisely, nay literally, in what particulars those who were supposed to lead and direct the majorities of that House, meant to resist and defeat the prayers of the petitions. An hon. gentleman behind him (Mr. Burke) had produced a Bill partly upon the plan of the petitions. It might not embrace every object described, or pointed to in the petitions. But he believed no person, on any side of the House, would dispute with him, that the Bill contained nothing but what was consonant to the letter and spirit of the petitions, nor excluded or determined against a syllable of their contents. He should not attempt to do that gentleman justice for his unwearied endeavours on that occasion, because, with the very best disposition to do it, he found himself totally unequal to the undertaking. He knew it would be painful to his hon. friend to hear his sentiments while present; but as an act of duty, which he thought himself bound to discharge, however irksome to his hon. friend, he could not pass over in silence, what must remain as a monument to be handed down to posterity, of the uncommon zeal, unrivalled industry, astonishing abilities, and invincible perseverance of the hon. gentleman. He had undertaken a task big with labour and difficulty; a task that embraced a variety of the most important objects, extensive, various, and complicated; yet such was the eminent and unequalled abilities, so extraordinary the talents and ingenuity, and such the fortunate frame of the hon. gentleman's mind, his vast capacity and happy conception, that in his hands, what must have proved a vast heap of ponderous matter, composed of heterogeneous ingredients, discordant in their nature, and opposite in principle, was so skilfully arranged as to become quite simple as to each respective part, dependent on each other; and the whole, at the same time, so judiciously combined, as to present nothing to almost any mind tolerably intelligent to divide, puzzle, or distract it. This was a true description of his hon. friend's Bill. He trusted that he would permit him to use that appellation, and it was his peculiar pride to be permitted to do so. But what was the consequence of such a Bill, brought forward by such a man? Upon its being first proposed, the united approbation of, he believed, every individual in that House. The highest, and, in his opinion, the best deserved eulogiums of every part; and he believed most sincerely, its genuine sentiments at the time, for he could safely make a distinction be tween the real sentiments of that House permitted to act according to its own immediate feelings, and the impressions afterwards made upon it arising from without. The House, he believed, expressed the former, on the occasion alluded to; when other opinions seemed to prevail, he most sincerely believed, and was firmly persuaded, that the latter temper and disposition which appeared towards his lion. friend's Bill, originated out of that House, and not within these walls. ward; the noble lord shrunk from the contest, under the same pretext that I foresee he will endeavour to defeat, or evade the resolution which I shall have the honour to move; and the hon. gentleman seemed himself not so sanguine, when the matter was decided by a question moved to take the sense of the House. Such being the reception of the Bill, Be that as it may, my hon. friend's clause or of the proposition for introducing it, was lost, under the pretence that the ofwhat was its reception when it was intro- fice proposed to be abolished was not useduced? Doubts were immediately started less, or, if it was, that no evidence of its as soon as it made its appearance. A being useless had appeared. I foresee, shew of candour, a kind of mock appro- likewise, that I shall be called on, for evibation was to be preserved. It might condence of the truth of what I shall move tain some matter worthy of consideration; in this committee. but it was shortly avowed by the noble lord, who is supposed to lead the majorities of this House, that the Bill, as to the great objects which it proposed to attain, was fundamentally wrong. What were those objects? Almost the very objects proposed to be obtained by the petitions now on your table; a reduction of the undue and unconstitutional influence of the crown, and an enquiry into the expenditure of the civil list, the abolishing sinecure places, exorbitant salaries, &c. Whatever dexterity may have been used, some matters came out in the course of this contest, which have in fact been the occasion of the trouble I am now going to give this House. In the course of this very important discussion, two fundamental points came into controversy; but more of that as I proceed. The first clause in the hon. gentleman's Bill relative to the office of a third Secretary of State, pursued the idea of the petitions; it went to the reduction of the public expenditure, and to the abolishing of an useless office. The noble lord in the blue ribbon, and an hon. gentleman of great abilities, and of great supposed weight in this House, met both principles fairly, in argument; but at the same time contended, that the place was not useless. The noble lord in the blue ribbon said, that the influence of the crown was not too great; another noble lord (Nugent) contended, that the influence of the crown, as stated in argument, was constitutional and necessary; and the hon. gentleman to whom I have just alluded (Mr. Rigby) met the other point insisted on in the petitions, the enquiry into the expenditure of his Majesty's civil list revenue, by saying it was not competent to this House. The hon. gentleman was challenged to bring his question for The next clause, relative to the abolition of the Board of Trade, was opposed on the same ostensible ground, of its not being useless. The minister however, besides the ostensible ground, maintained both the other doctrines, that the influence of the crown was not too much, and that the parliament had no right to controul the civil list expenditure; but the House was not to be drove. The House revolted, and the clause was carried by a small majority. What was the fate of the next clause? That was openly opposed in principle; which principle was supported, in one shape or other, by a great majority of this House. The King's household was deemed sacred, it was not to be touched; a distinction was made by those who gave the minister that majority; useless places which relate to the functions of the state may be abolished, but the King's revenue for the support of his household is his own private personal revenue, with which parliament neither have, nor can have, any thing to do. Here, I may say, my hon. friend's Bill was put an end to. The next attempt made in pursuance of the prayers of the petitions, was by an hon. friend of mine, (colonel Barré) with whom I have long lived in habits of the greatest intimacy and friendship. My hon. friend suggested the propriety of instituting a committee of accounts. This went to another part of the prayer of the petitions, the mode of collecting, transmitting, receiving, and issuing the public monies. My hon. friend, with great labour and indefatigable attention, aided by the ability and experience he is confessedly known to possess, spared no pains to render his plan as perfect as possible. A very few days had not intervened, before the noble lord in the blue ribbon, foreseeing their friends and confidents, pretend to predict, will miscarry in another place; or, should that not happen to be the case, boast that it will answer no one purpose of those who have framed and supported it. Such is the manner the dutiful and respectful petitions of the people of England has been treated. I trust, however, that the people of England, knowing how they have been treated, will resent the insult put upon them by those, who, to oppres sion and neglect, have added mockery and contempt. that many things extremely irksome and I unpleasant to his lordship might come out, should such a commission be instituted, # run a race with my hon. friend for the ↑ Bill; and without any private communication or previous information, snatched the Bill from out of the hands of my hon. friend, where it had been placed by the unanimous voice and approbation of the House. But my hon. friend by this act, which wore in its first aspect a very suspicious appearance, and in every respect a very uncandid ungentlemanlike appearance, had no reason to complain. Neither should I think, or care about who performed the duty to the public, so that it was well and faithfully performed. Was that the case? By no means. It is true his lordship has brought in a Bill, but what is it? A Bill appointing commissioners to inspect the public accounts, not the accounts in general, but some particular accounts, something relative to balances. Who, again, are to be the commissioners appointed to execute this business? Not members of this House; but persons out of it, to be appointed by the noble lord himself. A Bill of a similar nature was passed in the 2nd of William and Mary. In that Bill it was provided, that all the public accounts, including the civil list, should be enquired into, the privy purse and secret service money alone excepted; and this exception not to extend to persons in this House enjoying pensions. Here the civil list expenditure is totally omitted; and though it were not, no enquiry could extend to members enjoying pensions here, because the list of those pensions have been already denied by the noble lord. Another effort was made to diminish the influence of the crown, in this House, by an hon. gentleman (sir P. J. Clerke) by excluding persons holding contracts, made privately with any of the official boards, which was attended with more success than either of the other two I have mentioned; so that the whole of what has been done in consequence of that pile of parchment now on your table, containing the sentiments, the prayers, and petitions of above 100,000 electors, amounts, in the whole, to a single clause in my hon. friend's Bill, which standing naked, as it does, is of little or no importance; the proposition snatched out of my other hon. friend's hands, by the noble lord, and only snatched to insult you in this House, and mock your constituents out of it, and the Contractors' Bill, which ministers, or at least I would add a word or two, respecting my hon. friend below me, (colonel Barré), for the faithful and disinterested performance of his duty in this House; how has he been treated by some of his opponents? He has been called a dependant; I presume, alluding to the honour he enjoys in the friendship and intimacy of a certain noble lord, a member of the other House (lord Shelburne.) If that intimacy and friendship be a state of dependance, I am happy in classing myself among that noble lord's dependants. I will assure those who have alluded to what they call dependance, that it is a state of dependance, accompanied with perfect freedom. It is true, my hon. friend has been honoured with the noble lord's friendship, for upwards of 20 years; but I think I know the frame of mind and disposition of my hon. friend too well, to be persuaded that he would purchase any man's intimacy upon any terms short of a perfect equality, and mutual confidence; and I think I may likewise add, that if any person should attempt to purchase the noble lord's friendship, by mean or improper concessions, there is not a man on earth would more readily see through or despise it. I know the noble lord to be a great private, as well as public character. I know my hon. friend to possess a spirit of true independence. I am persuaded of the noble lord's great and acknowledged talents as a senator and a politician; and I can add, great as he may appear in a public light, that his private character is no less amiable and worthy of general admiration. Having endeavoured, as far as lay in my power, to describe what the petitioners mean, and what administration mean; on the other hand, give me leave to recur to the ground of my present proposed resolutions. I have already observed, that the great objects of the petitioners have been resisted both in argument and by public avowals, by the minister and his friends. They have told you that the in-ence. He cited a passage from Hume's fluence of the crown is not too much, and Essays, to shew that that able writer had ought not of course to be lessened; the prophesied, that arbitrary monarchy would petitioners have asserted the direct con- one day or other be the euthanasia of the trary. Ministers have told you, that it is British constitution. He could affirm upon not competent for this House to enquire his own knowledge, and pledge his honour into the expenditure of the civil list; the to the truth of the assertion, that he knew direct contrary are the sentiments of the upwards of fifty members in that House petitioners. To talk of petitions or redress who voted always in the train of the noble is vain, idle, nugatory, and ineffectual, lord in the blue ribbon; that confessed out while these two points are maintained by of the House, that the influence of the those who have the majority of the House. crown was increased, and dangerously inTo bring both these points fairly to issue, creased. He adduced several arguments I mean to frame two. propositions, ab- of a similar nature, and sat down, he said, stracted from the petitions on your table, with this consolation, that neither the miand take the sense of the committee upon nority of that House, nor the people at them. I mean that they shall be short, large, would be any longer mocked and and as simple as possible, so as to draw insulted with this or that management or forth a direct affirmative or negative. If trick, this or that evasion; for the certain the committee should agree with me in the alternative would be, that the decision on resolutions, I mean to follow them up with the question now proposed by him would real, substantive, practicable measures; declare, whether the petitions were to be but should they disagree or dissent, or en- really attended to, or finally and totally deavour to evade or procrastinate, there rejected. will be at once an end of the petitions, and a full answer to the petitioners. Earl Nugent observed, that the hon. gentleman had founded his motion upon It may be asked, are my propositions to the petitions then lying on the table. He be taken from the petitions on the table? had, from time to time, attended to the Are they to be worded in the language of contents of the said petitions, and did not this or that petition? By no means. Some recollect any part which accorded with may be more extensive, others may be more the two resolutions stated by the hon. genfull and specific; it will suffice that my pro- tleman. He acknowledged, that some of positions will not differ from any, as to the the petitions stated one grievance, and principle, though copied from none. My some another, but none of them any thing first resolution will be, "That it is the resembling the proposition moved, or the opinion of this committee, that it is neces- other proposition opened by the learned sary to declare, that the influence of the gentleman. The propositions did not go crown has increased, is increasing, and so far as many of the petitions, and they ought to be diminished." My second, went farther than others. Some of the pe"That it is competent to this House, to titions were confined merely to the econoexamine into, and to correct, abuses in the mical expenditure of public money; some expenditure of the civil list revenues, as to the abolition of sinecure places, unmewell as in every other branch of the pub-rited pensions, exorbitant salaries, &c. and lic revenue, whenever it shall appear expedient to the wisdom of this House so to do." He then proceeded to argue the question on the ground of notoriety, that the influence of the crown was increased, and ought to be diminished, having first regularly moved it. He supported his argument, not upon proof, which he said it was idle to require, and must be decided by the consciences of those who as a jury were called upon to determine what was or was not within their own knowledge. He quoted Mr. Hume to prove, that he foresaw the increasing influence so early as the year 1742; and also quoted judge Blackstone as an authority for its exist many of them proceeded on the idea, that the influence of the crown had increased to a degree dangerous to the liberties of the people. Such being the real state of the petitions on the table, he recommended the learned gentleman to modify his motion, so as to take up the specific prayer of some one petition, or frame it so as to make it an aggregate of them all; otherwise, the resolution now moved must be considered to be the learned gentleman's own opinion on the subject, and not that of any one set or class of petitioners. In the course of discussing the resolution therefore, it would not admit of the matter contained in the said petitions being more than collaterally introduced into the |