Mr. Put observed, that it had hitherto | formerly founded their opposition to the been usual for gentlemen on the opposite Treaty-the evil tendency of its political side to oppose the Treaty on commercial operation. With respect to that, he agreed principles, as likely to injure the trade and entirely with his learned friend (Mr. Scott), manufactures of this country; but it now that the arguments on that view of the appeared, from the argument of a right question, if they had any weight at all, hon. gentleman who had taken an active went not to the delaying, but the entire part in the debate, and who had displayed rejection of the system. But gentlemen a very uncommon share of ability (and by- finding all their objections to the measure the-by he had never before heard a sub- itself perfectly untenable, had that day ject handled on both sides of the House resorted to a fresh argument, adapted to with greater ability than the present)-it the present stage of the business, and appeared from the arguments of that right calculated to impede what they saw it hon. gentleman, that that ground of oppo- would be impossible for them, with any sition was at length fully abandoned. prospect of success, fairly to oppose: they [Here, Mr. Burke showing some inclina- now attempted to complain, that there tion to interrupt Mr. Pitt, he begged he was an intention of coupling the introwould hear him out, and then either con- duction of a system of French commerce tradict his facts, or dispute his inferences.] with an adoption of the principles of the He admitted, that in a commercial light French constitution. What! was there the Treaty appeared exceptionable, though any thing slavish or inconsistent with the with a view to manufacture it was salu- British constitution for the House of Comtary and advantageous. How such a con- mons to approach his Majesty with an adtradiction could be reconciled, he could dress, informing him that they have taken not conceive; but from the way in which into their serious consideration a subject the right hon. gentleman endeavoured to recommended by his Majesty, as likely to make it out, it was evident that no such produce the most happy consequences paradox could exist in the present in- to his subjects; and that after the most stance, even if it could exist in any. The mature deliberation they are ready to right hon. gentleman had endeavoured to co-operate with his Majesty in those show, that by means of our great trading measures, which, together with him, they capital, our manufactures were secured; think highly beneficial to the kingdom? but the very circumstance of the exten- So far from any abandonment of the spirit siveness of that capital would become the of the British constitution, this proceedmeans of transferring the disposal of our ing was such as no constitution but a free manufactures from our own hands to those one could admit of. Gentlemen on the of France: this was a consequence of the other side had called for precedents, and enjoyment of a great capital, which he had had founded much of their argument never heard before, and which he believed against the Address on the scarcity of such would require a greater degree of proof precedents: but he wished gentlemen, than the right hon. gentleman's argument, before they insisted on any great number however ingenious and eloquent, could of precedents, would show him that there possibly afford it. On the whole, he was had ever been many instances, in which convinced, that after what had appeared it had proved necessary for that House to in that House-after the letters which sanction by its concurrence any treaties they had heard read by gentlemen who entered into by the Crown. The fact was, represented those parts of the kingdom there were scarcely any such instances to which abounded most in manufactures, be found: but he could, notwithstanding, expressing not only the concurrence of produce a precedent decisively in point, their constituents in the measure, but and which at the same time was a stronger their ardent anxiety for its immediate case than the present-a precedent of but completion-when this express approba- two years standing. The precedent he tion of many was confirmed by the alluded to was that of the address on the silence of almost all the rest, he was subject of the Irish propositions, by which convinced that in a commercial view of the House had pledged its consistency to the subject, there was scarcely a pos- the passing of certain acts for the purpose sibility for any difference of opinion. of carrying those propositions into effect. The gentlemen who opposed the Address Mr. Pitt compared the two cases together, had not, however, abandoned the other contending that they were exactly in ground of objection on which they had point with each other, and that no objec | duties, the House of Lords, if it were sent up to them in the shape of a bill, would not be at liberty to make any alterations in it; whereas, being sent to them only as a resolution, they would not by any means find themselves so circumscribed. Mr. Sheridan said, that he meant to move a new question-the question of adjournment-in order that he might have an opportunity of proposing a resolution upon the subject of the extraordinary doctrines laid down by the Chancellor of the Exchequer; doctrines as new and as unconstitutional as ever were heard within those walls. If the right hon. gentleman had entertained the notion which he had just suggested to the House, he ought to have risen the other day, and declared that he did entertain such opinions, when he (Mr. S.) had expressly said, that an address precluded the House from farther debate, a and ought not therefore to be a measure proposed, till every other step had been taken, and the House had given its final vote. By his silence, when he had thus talked of an address, the right hon. gentleman had given his assent to his argument. The right hon. gentleman had told the House, that he could produce a precedent for such an address as the present, and had instantly mentioned one of his own. This was the great feature of the right hon. gentleman's administration, which commenced in proceedings directly contrary to the constitution, and had abounded with instances of outrage against tion could be made at the present period, But he nevertheless dared the right hon. gentleman openly to stand up and maintain, that an address, of the nature of that which the House had that night been called upon to vote, could be justified. Mr. For said, that as his hon. friend had omitted to state what resolution he meant to move, he would declare, that his object was to move a resolution," that it was the opinion of that House, that it was impossible for them to bind or preclude themselves by any address to the throne, from either debating or voting upon any subsequent legislative question whatever." Mr. Fox reiterated his former arguments, to show the propriety of proceeding by way of Bill, and instanced the case of the Irish propositions, declaring that no man present dreamt of moving an address, stating in express words to the throne, that the House would pass any specific number of bills for the purpose of enforcing the propositions. Had such an address been moved, it would have been repro him to enter at all into a discussion with him on that ground. It was true that no resolution of that House could absolutely bind it down to the future adoption of any measure whatsoever; and if, after passing any resolution, the House should see proper grounds for changing its opinion, it certainly was not only competent to act in contradiction to such resolution, but it was its duty so to do. But, at the same time, no gentleman ought ever to give his vote on a resolution of that nature, unless he was reasonably assured, in his own mind, that no circumstances could happen to induce him to change his opinion; and he hoped that such a principle would govern every gentleman who should vote with him on the present question. The House divided on Mr. Sheridan's motion of adjournment: Yeas, 116; Noes, 236. bated. In the case of the peace of Utrecht, let the House recollect that a bill had been brought in to enact the eighth and ninth articles of the Treaty of Commerce. The question for leave to bring in the Bill, had, on a division, been carried by an uncommonly large majority, the numbers having been above 100 to 12 or 13. It was read a second time upon a division of a large majority also; and it went through the committee, and two or three days afterwards, was in the very last stage thrown out by a majority of 194 voices against 185.* This proved the importance of a regular compliance with the forms of the House, and a due exercise of the deliberative powers. A large majority had thus been, by mere dint of debate and discussion, converted into a minority, and one of the worst and most hostile treaties to the British constitution that ever was heard of, was put an end to and annihilated. What was the reason that the right hon. gentleman did not proceed in the same way now? The reason was obvious. Aware of the event of 1713, he was determined to proceed in another manner: and in order to insure the success of his treaty, instead of risking the chance of deliberation, he had profited by the fate of the Treaty of Utrecht, and had caused an address to be moved to tie up the hands of the House, and preclude all debate, and all danger of future opposition. Had lord Bolingbroke and Mr. Harley, in 1713, been aware of the fate of their Treaty, they, no doubt, would have aimed at doing the same thing; but in those days, when one of the most powerful factions governed this country that had ever been in possession of power, they never dreamt of venturing such a length as the right hon. gentleman, who had profited by the shortsightedness of the ministry of 1713, and had whetted his sagacity upon their dullness. Mr. Pitt lamented that he was still doomed to feel the extremely uncandid manner in which the right hon. gentleman accustomed himself to argue every question in which he took a part in that House. Instead of adhering to the subject in debate, he contrived on all occasions to introduce inflammatory topics, and to insinuate, without a colour or pretence, that something hostile was intended by him to the constitution. The House, however, were sufficiently acquainted with the right hon. gentleman to make it unnecessary for See Vol. vi. pp. 1210, 1220. [VOL. XXVI.] & The main question being then put, the motion for an Address was agreed to. After which a committee was appointed to draw up and prepare the Address; and the same being read and approved of by the House, was communicated to the Lords at a conference, together with the resolutions. Debate in the Lords on the State of our Trade with Portugal.] Feb. 23. The order of the day being read, The Duke of Norfolk observed, that he felt a great pleasure in discovering that the business to which he meant to call the attention of their lordships, was concen trated in a single point; and consequently, that he should have occasion to give their lordships the less trouble. He then proceeded to state the great advantages this country had derived from her commercial connexion with Portugal under the Methuen Treaty; and said that, before we entered into new engagements with France, the natural rival of this country in commerce as in power, it behoved us to take care and secure, beyond all risk, our old customer and ally, the kingdom of Portugal. He entered into a discussion of the account of our exports and imports to and from Portugal, as given in a printed paper on the table, and said to have been made up by the factory at Lisbon and Oporto. He declared the paper to be the most incorrect document that he ever knew submitted to parlia ment, and intimated his suspicions that it was designed for the purpose of depre ciating the value of our trade with Por [2 L] tugal. He examined it article by article, asserting that it was erroneously cast up to the amount of 36,000l., and contended, that the balance of the trade with Portugal, in our favour, was stated at about 240,000. when in fact it amounted to upwards of 400,000l. In order to ascertain this point, he reasoned upon each of the items, and pointed out the particulars in which he thought them erroneous. He stated our export trade to amount to more than a million a year, and said the articles were woollen cloths, and 150,000l. worth of salt fish, the mere carriage of which from Newfoundland occupied sixty vessels. On the other hand, he expatiated on the usefulness of our import articles from Portugal, most of which were indis pensably necessary for our own manufactures; he instanced the Brazil cotton, the salt to manufacture our Newfoundland fish with, the oil to dress our cloths with, and other articles equally necessary for our manufactures. If the import of Brazil cotton made a balance against us of 100,000l. a year, he should be glad to find we had such a source of raw material for our very valuable cotton manufacture. He stated, that cotton which cost us 3s. and 3s. 6d. a pound in Portugal, sold here as high as three or four pounds per pound weight. The motion which he meant to offer, in his mind would prove equally satisfactory to the friends of ministers as to those in opposition. The duke concluded with reading the following motions; "That the Treaty concluded in 1703, between the Crowns of Great Britain and Portugal, called the Methuen Treaty, is a perpetual subsisting treaty, and has invariably been found productive of various benefits to the commerce of the two kingdoms. 2. That it is highly expedient that any difference that may have arisen upon the construction of the said Treaty, be amicably adjusted, and such farther arrangements adopted as may effectually secure the uninterrupted continuation thereof, before we proceed to the confirmation of the Treaty now depending with France."-The first motion being put, The Marquis of Buckingham declared, that he should oppose it. The marquis then traced the connexion between the two countries, and between Great Britain and France, from 1640, down to the present time, noting all the historical facts, such as Oliver Cromwell's treaty, the wicked policy of Charles 2nd's ministers, the treaties of James 2, the conduct of William and Mary, the prohibition of our woollens on the part of the Court of Portugal, the effect it had upon our exportation, the formation of the Methuen Treaty, the consequences that had resulted from it, the instances in which Portugal had broken her faith to us, as pledged by the Treaty in the year 1703, and the ground on which we had lately negociated with her through Mr. Falkener. He stated the terms of the Methuen Treaty, and the opinions that the greatest writers on the subject had maintained in 1713, when its merits and construction were so deeply the subject of discussion. The general opinion was, that the Treaty bound Portugal but that it was optional on the part of this country to adhere to it or not. He observed, that the woollens which we exported to Portugal, though an object of some importance, compared to the general export of British woollen, amounted to a mere trifle. According to the Methuen Treaty, British woollens had been stipulated to be imported into Portugal on low and advantageous duties; but Portugal had since, in direct violation of the Methuen Treaty, imposed various duties upon them. She had laid on one duty under pretence of building a customhouse at Lisbon, and that custom-house having been since consumed by fire and rebuilt, the duty still continued, though it had been rebuilt the second time, more than 14 years ago. Portugal had imposed another duty on the British imports into that kingdom, on account of the erection of another custom-house in another place, and she had lately formed a new book of rates, in which, under different pretences, additional duties were imposed upon our woollens and other articles. The marquis followed the noble duke through his examen of the paper on the table, and controverted his line of argument respecting its terms. He contended that it was a fair paper, and that the factory could have no interest in misleading. He laid out of the statement all the amount of the trade of Ireland, and very considerably reduced the balance in favour of this country. He spoke of the fallacy of custom-house books in general, arguing that the entries were sometimes, through the vanity of the exporter, aggravated and exaggerated on the one hand, and the amount concealed on the arrival of the goods at Portugal, on the other. He declared that he must refuse his assent to a motion, the words of which, in his mind, The Duke of Norfolk said, he had no objection to leave out those words, if that would induce the noble marquis to support his motion. The Marquis of Buckingham replied, that no alteration could induce him to give his consent to a motion, which ap peared to him to be more likely to embarrass Government, and procrastinate the event of the pending negociation, than to accelerate it. were inapplicable, viz. the denominating | sound reasoning he was anxious to find the existing Treaty, a permanent and out some clear and incontrovertible data, perpetual treaty. on which he might proceed to ground a conclusive argument; for speculative declamation, on either side, was quite be neath the importance of the subject, and unworthy the attention of the House. He could not, he thought, proceed on better grounds than by submitting to their lordships consideration, an abstract statement of our foreign commerce, from the year 1740 to the conclusion of the last peace. He pitched upon that period, because it was during that period that we had sustained the burthen of three wars; the two last of which were conducted on such a scale of expense as must, had it not been for the increase of our foreign commerce, have utterly undone the nation. My lords, he said, we are not yet undone; there is nothing in the circumstances of the country which should drive us, like merchants of bankrupt credit, to dangerous speculations; we yet stand high amongst the nations of the earth, attracting the admi. ration and exciting the envy of all Europe. The Bishop of Landaff (Dr. Watson) said, he could not decline embracing the first public opportunity which had been offered him, of delivering his sentiments on the Commercial Treaty, between France and Great Britain; he conceived it to be a subject of as great importance, as had ever been debated since he had the honour of a seat in that House. His sentiments, he said, were decidedly against the Treaty; and he begged it might be observed, that his opinion was not idly taken up, or rashly entertained; all those with whom he had conversed upon the subject, and he had conversed with not a few, could witness for him, that this was his opinion from the first moment the Treaty was announced to the public, and every thing that he had heard or read concerning it, confirmed him in it. If he could have suffered any bias to have influenced him on the occasion, it certainly would have been a bias from personal acquaintance, attachment, connexion, from a thousand motives, to have concurred in opinion with the chief supporters of the Treaty; but his mind was against it, and he could not do it; his judgment was against it, and he would not do it. In considering the subject, he would take a wider field than what had been pointed out by the motion of the noble duke; he would not merely consider the question, as it affected our trade with Portugal, but as it affected our foreign trade with all the world, being persuaded that the more intelligent and comprehensive view their lordships had of the question, the more likely they would be to come to a just and proper conclusion. The question before their lordships, he observed, was of such a novel, extensive, and complicated nature, its consequences were so much involved in darkness and conjecture, that he scarcely knew how to treat it on principles of The most flourishing period of commerce which this country had ever seen, was about the year 1750; we had during other periods larger exports, but the ba lance of trade in our favour was then at the highest; it amounted to near five millions and an half a year; but if we had taken the annual average from the year 1740 to the year 1780, it would appear to be four millions; it would be somewhat less if we took the average up to the year 1782: but as the circumstances of the nation in the year 1781, were so singular, that the balance of trade was against this country, it would be just, he said, to assume four millions as our annual balance from the year 1740 to the conclusion of the last peace. This account of the sums we had annually gained by our foreign commerce he assumed as a fact established by the Custom-bouse books. He was quite aware that speculative men might object to the establishing the prosperity of a country by the balance of its trade, or to the judging of that balance by the Custom-house books; that was not a time or place to discuss those points, since all would allow that when long periods of time were taken together, it was perhaps the best method which could be used; and though it did not arrive at geometrical certainty, it was certain enough for a general conclusion. Assuming, then, four millions as the |