vereign he served, in regard to a desire to have œconomy strictly adhered to, would give way to no sovereign on the face of the globe.

Mr. Dempster asserted that the noble lord had laid down a position which could not be debated, and therefore he had spoken contrary to order.

Lord North maintained, that he had only paid a just compliment to his sovereign; that he had not used the name of the King to influence the debate, as a screen for a minister, as a refuge, or in any of those points of view which the order of the House was directed at.

Mr. Dunning interrupted the noble lord, to tell him that what he had said was impertinent to the subject in debate. That perhaps the noble lord would plead that in excuse, but its being impertinent was no excuse; the noble lord ought to know that the House of Commons was not a place for compliments to the sovereign; that no one gentleman present was to learn the amiable virtues of their prince, it was therefore unnecessary and improper to blazon them within those walls, and could only be done with a view to influence debate. Another thing the noble lord had said, he could not suffer to pass unnoticed, and that was his declaration, that the people of England could only be heard through their representatives. He denied this doctrine; every man, the meanest subject, had a right to petition his sovereign.

Lord North said most certainly every man, a subject of that kingdom, had the right described by the learned gentleman, and God forbid it should ever be questioned or denied. But then a petition so delivered, was the petition of the individual or individuals who signed it. He had been speaking of the people of England collectively, who could only be heard by their representatives. His lordship having said this, went into a general reply to all that had been thrown out in the course of the debate; and first, he took notice of what general Conway had said relative to the finances of France, and the advisers of the crown. It was impossible, he declared, to know the state of the former, from the French edicts. They were generally admirable productions of very able men, drawn up in the most soothing terms, and studiously designed to have a pleasing effect on the subjects. If the hon. gentleman were to look back on the edicts of the last reign, which was undoubtedly, as the

first edict of Louis 16 declared it to have been, a reign of great dissipation and great liberality, the hon. gentleman would find all the edicts of that day drawn up in the same persuasive and soothing stile of address to the passions of the people. The hon. gentleman had said a great deal about the French not having imposed any taxes; the hon. gentleman must recollect, that where great abuses had prevailed, great savings could be made; the last reign having been a very dissipated one, there was the greater room for reform on the accession of Louis 16. As to that prince's household, the maison civile du roi differed very essentially from our King's civil list; the sum was astonishingly larger, neither did any part of it go to public expences; whereas a very great proportion of the civil list was applied to the payment of our ambassadors, and otherwise to the public use. The financier of France was undoubtedly a man of great talents, and he believed deserved the greatest encomiums, but it was not possible to judge what state the finances of France were in, because, according to the form of the French government, the minister could anticipate and go on at a great expence, without the people's knowing it; whereas, in this country, whenever a great measure was adopted, the minister was expected to propose a tax immediately to answer the expence; a minister here would not be suffered to anticipate. His lordship then observed, that it had frequently been urged that queen Anne gave 100,000l. a year during the war in her reign, out of her civil list. The fact was so, but gentlemen forgot that this boon was only given for five years, and that the sixth year the minister came to parliament, and upon stating the debts of the civil list, obtained a grant of 600,000l. He had this example before him, and therefore he had been backward in proposing a similar measure, because he could by no means approve of recommending his Majesty to give that as a boon which was afterwards to be demanded back again as a debt. When he had last applied to parliament to pay the debts of the civil list, it had been asked if he would answer for it, that he would not again apply for a similar purpose, and would engage, that when the prince of Wales's houshold was established, the expence would be paid out of the civil list, as it would then stand at 900,000l. a year. He said he had not, at that time, engaged, because he could not speak with certainty,

and he hoped he should always be cautious how he made engagements. He could now, however, tell the committee, that the prince of Wales's houshold should be paid without any additional claim on the public. The civil list was apparently in arrear, but not in reality; because it had been in advance for great public purposes, and that money would come back again. His lordship declared that the war had occasioned great expences, which immediately affected the civil list. He stated that the American refugees were paid a large sum annually out of it. That on an application from the island of Barbadoes some time since, complaining of their being in the most pressing distress for want of provisions, his Majesty had ordered 30,000l. to be advanced to buy provisions, and had caused them to be sent to the island. His Majesty had also ordered 16,000l. in like manner to be advanced in consequence of a similar application lately from the island of Antigua. After going through a variety of particulars, all tending to prove, that the civil list arrears were occasioned by the great expence of secret service money, and other necessary public purposes, his lordship adverted to the clause, and repeated his dislike to tear the civil establishment to pieces by act of parliament; declaring at the same time that the Bill had no object which might not to the full as well be effected by address to the

throne.

Sir Horace Mann said, he saw if he moved an address, he should not be supported by the noble lord; he would therefore decline any such measure.

Mr. Townshend replied to lord North. Lord G. Gordon also cut about him, and concluded with saying, he would have nothing to do with such an old clothes business, but would vote against the clause. The committee at length divided: Ayes, 162; Noes 210.

The Committee then proceeded upon the next clause, viz. that for abolishing the Board of Works.

Mr. Whitshed Keene gave a full account of the use of the Board of Works, and a detail of works done by it within these few years, to the amount of 881,000l. which he said could not otherwise have been done for the public so cheaply.

Mr. Burke made a most witty and laughable reply, comparing the Board of

* "It was generally agreed, both by memhers and strangers, that Mr. Burke had not

Works to the Fox alehouse, a little, contemptible, ill convenient and ill conditioned tenement, which any person would ride by without noticing, but which, upon paper and with the help of oratory, would fill many sheets, and cut as splendid a figure in description as the noblest palace.

The Committee divided: Ayes 118; Noes 203. Lord G. Gordon then moved that the Committee should adjourn, and the chairman report a progress, and ask leave to sit again.

Debate in the Commons on the Bill for appointing Commissioners to examine the Public Accounts.] May 1. The House went into a Committee on the Bill. After reading the preamble,

Lord North rose, and began with assuring the House, that he had no intention in moving that the commissioners should not be members of parliament, either to take away from that House any one of its privileges, to abridge its powers, to delegate them into improper hands, or to insinuate either directly or indirectly, that there were not within those walls men of as much integrity and ability, as much honour in themselves and as much zeal for the public welfare, as any men in the kingdom. He was convinced there were, and the only reason why he had proposed that the commissioners should not be members, really was, because the common parliamentary business was now so great, debates ran so high, and the times were so contentious, that almost every gentleman had taken either one side or the other, and therefore if they were chosen commissioners, their conduct in that situation would be liable to very great misconstruction; and he did not believe their being appointed commissioners would give the people so much satisfaction, as if gentlemen without doors of known abilities and respectable characters were named for that office. He added to this, that on looking back to former commissions, those which had not been composed of members had done the best service for the public, the others in general turning out mere party matters, and ending in nothing. Another

made so agreeable a figure in the House of Commons for many years as on this evening. He evidently came down with his mind made up to the fate of the remaining clauses of his Bill, and therefore treated them with all that ready wit, pleasantry, and good humour, which are the real features of his character." Political Magazine, vol. 1, p. 473.

were merchants, and such men as were likely to be the best judges of buying and selling either by contract or otherwise. The name he should first mention to the committee, would be that of a gentleman, to whom possibly some objection might be made, because he was free to own he was a placeman, and what was more, he was a placeman of his making, but in no one act of his public life did he glory more, because he was convinced, from his great ability and knowledge of business, that gentleman had done his country most essential service. He was a man not by any means unknown, a man of as upright a heart, as clear a head, and as honest a mind, as any one man living, let his station in life be what it would. The gentleman he alluded to was Mr. Thomas Bowlby, comptroller of the army accounts. He was one whose talents, as well as the many recommendations he had received from various quarters, pointed him out as a very fit person to be a commissioner. At the head of those, however, he would name sir Guy Carleton, an officer of such distinguished merit, and such exalted character, that he presumed no gentleman would make the smallest objection. Sir Guy Carleton therefore, he meant for one commissioner. Mr. Bowlby for a second, and he should next name

reason, likewise, why he preferred gentlemen without doors to gentlemen within, was, that by adopting the former, all that ground of offence to the other House of Parliament, which had been given on former occasions, would be removed, and the possibility of a difference with the Lords avoided, a matter which was at all times to be wished, but particularly at present. His lordship stated what the occasion of the differences with the other House was upon former Commission Bills; declaring that the Lords had then objected to the commissioners being members of the House of Commons on these two grounds; that the House of Commons by naming their own members, took from them the right of nomination and election, which they alledged they possessed as well as the Commons, and that the commissioners being members of parliament, were not subject to that controul, which they ought to have a power of exercising over persons delegated to inquire into and report the state of the public accounts. These objections he thought much stronger than many people had imagined, and therefore it became additionally proper to avoid occasioning a difference with the Lords now. He then went on to state that as in former commissions, he should limit the number of commissioners to nine persons, and the time of the commission remaining in force to one twelvemonth, by the expiration of which time he thought the business of the commission might be done; but if it should not, the House would have it in their power to continue the Act in force for a longer time.Having mentioned these preliminaries, his lordship proceeded to the nomination of the commissioners. They must, he said, from the nature of the accounts which would come before them be men of different lines in life, and of different pursuits. As a large part of the accounts would refer to the army, he had turned his eye towards able officers, who were competent to judge of the propriety of the expences incurred in the management of the military in America. He had next looked to the law, and to those of that profession who were most in the habits of settling accounts, and adjusting differences between parties; for these he had gone to the Chancery, the great court of account of the kingdom, and there he had fixed on those who were immediately concerned in accounts, viz. the masters. The third de scription of persons he had thought of,

Mr. Byng rose suddenly and said, as the insult about to be put on the House was of the most intolerable kind, no less than a daring attempt to sink them in the most debasing manner, and annihilate their best privileges, he begged the noble lord would nominate but one person at a time, that the committee might pass their judgment on that one, before they proceeded to take a second into their consideration.

Mr. Brett rose, as the House was rather proceeding to disorder, to beg that gentlemen would be serious, and consider the very great importance of the subject before them.

Mr. Burke ironically congratulated the noble lord on his glorious beginning, and begged that he might be suffered to proceed without interruption through his nomination, declaring he was extremely desirous of seeing the whole dramatis persona, since it was impossible to judge of any drama by a sight of only one or two of its personages, but that the whole must pass in review, not only the King and Princes, but the first, second, and third mob, and all the retinue.

General Conway declared he felt him

Colonel Barré reprobated this as an unprecedented want of candour. He declared whenever a gentleman desired to withdraw his motion, it was always usual to allow him to do it.

Mr. Cornwall was for considering the present question as decisive, and if it were carried for the chairman to leave the chair, to take it as a decision that the commissioners should be members of parliament; but if it were carried, that he should not leave the chair, to take it the other way, and proceed in the nomination. He mentioned the committee for the taking an account of the Irish estates that were forfeited, near the close of the last century, as a proof that committees, which were composed of strangers, had been allowed by that House.

Mr. Dunning insisted, that so far from the present Bill complying with the prayer of the petitions, or answering the wishes of the people of England, it ran directly counter to both. The people of England most unequivocally called upon the House to correct the gross abuses in the expenditure of public money, to reduce all exorbitant emoluments, to rescind and abolish all sinecure places, and unmerited pensions, and to appropriate the produce to the necessities of the state, in such manner, as to the wisdom of parliament shall seem meet. The petitioners looked up to the House as possessing the means to go to, and to exterminate the root of the evil, opportunity to trace it to the bottom, by proper and necessary investigation, and power to eradicate it effectually, totally and without danger of leaving the smallest vestiges of its existence. Did the Bill shew, in any one sense whatever, that the House possessed the power which the people of England supposed it to possess, or did it amount to a proof, or any thing like a proof, that they were willing, possessing that power ascribed to them, so to exercise it, as to answer the expectation of the people without doors? On the contrary, was not the present Bill a solemn and formal renunciation of the powers ascribed to that House by the petitioners? Was it not apparently and substantially a resignation of the rights of the House, if any such rights they possessed, as the petitioners perhaps improperly, perhaps ignorantly, supposed they did possess, and a total abdication of them as far as they could be usefully exercised, in truly, seriously, and solemnly proceeding to afford the relief and redress of grievances which

the people of England required at the hands of that House? Did the noble lord, if the purport of his speech was at all to be relied on, afford the least hopes, that even admitting for a moment, though by no means agreeing to the proposition, that it was either wise, warrantable, or consonant to the constitution of parliament, to delegate on any occasion those rights which belonged to the House of Commons? Did the noble lord however, admitting the proposition in its utmost extent, give the least ground for hope, that he wished to delegate the rights of the House of Commons to such hands as were proper to be entrusted with so extraordinary a delegation? Without entering into a discussion, or meaning to question the character, honour, integrity, or ability, of the intended commissioners, and agreeing fully and entirely, as he believed every gentleman would most readily agree, that the two persons, who had been named, merited all the encomiums which the noble lord had been pleased to pass upon them, was it not fair to conclude that all the commissioners, whom the noble lord intended to nominate, would be placemen? He meant not to say that they would all be placemen in the present tense, but changing the tense, they would be placemen; placemen now, or placemen in the highest probable expectancy, placemen in future. He then, with infinite poignancy of wit, turned all the three descriptions of strangers pointed out by lord North, as fit persons for commissioners, into ridicule. The military commanders he objected to as incompetent from their want of familiarity with accounts and papers, the masters in chancery for their characteristic delay, (appealing to the House whether most of the gentlemen present could not feelingly witness the tediousness of the processes in chancery), and the merchants as expectant contractors. In the course of his speech, he expressed his surprise at hearing sir Guy Carleton nominated by the noble lord. That officer had never before been honoured with the nod of Jupiter, nor did he recollect that any of his satellites had on any former occasion shot off to illuminate his character. He concluded with expressing his wish, that the noble lord might be suffered to proceed in the nomination of his intended commissioners, that the House might fully know the extent of the noble lord's attempt to persuade them to resign and abdicate those powers with which they were constitutionally invested.