Chapter III: Part 3

But, admitting that this defensive plan may have been but recently adopted, how are Administration to regain the time they have lost, or what resources of finance are still unexhausted to prosecute even this plan? Are all the Country Gentlemen equally disposed to devote fifteen shillings in the pound to carry on this defensive war? Are they all equally delighted with the great and growing ruin of an accumulating debt and a decreasing revenue? Or do they rest their hopes on the wealth of our East-India trade? Do they know that, there too, the French are undermining the foundation of our commerce? Or is it studiously concealed from them, that the French ministry have sent Monsieur Vaugelin to Canton, in the quality of their Consul at the Chinese Court?⸺He had heard much of a sudden increase of national wealth by our late captures, but, at best, the prizes of privateers are a partial benefit; they can enrich but a few individuals; they afford no diminution of the general burthens of a whole people. In the present instance, the truth was these boasted prizes were, in fact, public losses; the French having had the art to insure their most valuable ships, particularly the Indiamen, by English policies—besides that, several of the richest captures were actually freighted with consignments to English merchants.

But, supposing this extraordinary spirit of bounty should become general among the Country Gentlemen, and that, to support a war which had totally lost the original object of revenue, for which they had been tempted to engage in it; supposing they were all well inclined to a land-tax of fifteen shillings in the pound, and determined to overflow the Exchequer with an extraordinary redundance of profusion, yet would they be particularly happy that all that wealth should be portioned out to subsidise Hanover, Hesse-Cassel, Hanau, Waldeck, Brandebourg-Anspach, and all the mercenaries of Germany? Or that it should wholly be devoted to satiate the monopolising avarice of a Russian alliance? You have no force at home—you are almost defenseless.⸺

[Sidenote: Col. T[u]ffn[e]ll.]

(Here he was called to order by Colonel Tuffnell for speaking of the _defenceless_ state of this country.) Col. _T[u]ffn[e]ll_ said, the word _defenceless_ was, to the last degree, improper and disorderly; for that he himself had the command at Dover Castle, opposite Calais, where, though the country all about it was rather flat, he would not wish such a word as _defenceless_ to be sent from that house to Paris, by any friend of Dr. Franklin’s. And, as he was on his legs, he must say, that word _defenceless_ was doubly wrong, from the late state of the camps; where, in spite of French spies, there had been the utmost discipline, unanimity, peace, and quietness; except, indeed, some desertions, much nakedness, frequent floggings, and several duels.

Mr. _F[o]x_ then proceeded, without any remark on this interruption; and observed, that every petty Landgrave and Margrave had already been exhausted; they had no more Chasseurs, no more mercenary boors, to fight, or rather not to fight, our battles. Russia is frozen up for some months; and, not improbably, the courts of Berlin and Vienna would sufficiently engage her in their Bavarian contest; or, at least, not make it adviseable for her to lessen the internal defence of a country surrounded with such powerful armies. As to the Fleet, how could it be recruited with sailors or marines? Though even the spirit of adventure could instantly man every Privateer that had been fitted out, yet the noble Lord at the head of the Admiralty had pretended to palliate his own incapacity and criminal neglect, by alledging it was almost impossible, even with an extraordinary bounty, and the utmost rigour of an Impress and an Embargo, to man the Royal Fleet—the fact was, the minds of the people were obstinately bent against this American war; nay, even against a French war, when France became the protector of America.

With such Ministers, such principles, such plans, such internal resources, such prospects of alliance; Gentlemen were now called on to echo the Speech, to panegyrize an Administration too despicable for satire, to plunge this devoted country in aggravated ruin, and, with a remorseless dispair, to _desolate_ what they had found impossible to _subdue_.

[Sidenote: Lord N[o]rth.]

L[o]rd _N[o]rth_.[8] Mr. Sp[eake]r, at the same time that I agree with many Gentlemen who have spoken in the course of this day’s debate, that the present is a very serious moment of deliberation, I can by no means join with them in thinking our situation is desperate, though, I confess, it is distressing.

Sir, in all cases of distress or difficulty there is some relief to be found in comparison. Gentlemen who hear me, will admit that this country, in former wars, has been acquainted with unfortunate events. The loss of some of our possessions, and the failure of enterprizes, marked the onset of last war. Commanders were unsuccessful, perhaps criminal;—I do not mean to draw a complete analogy between that period and the present—I only mean to observe, that there has been no difficulty in modern times, from which this Country has not been able to extricate itself, when rouzed by a sense of its wrongs, and determined to vindicate its justice, its dignity, and its honour.⸺In saying this, I shall be told by Gentlemen that we were indebted to a great Character in the midst of our misfortunes during the last war, and that, by his vigour and enterprizing genius, this Country was extricated from her embarrassing situation. I will join heartily in paying that tribute of truth to his memory⸺Would to God that such a man were alive at this moment, to step forward with the full exertion of the same zeal, and the same talents. I would yield to none as a second in the work, though I confess my inability to be employed as a first.

Sir, the Honourable Gentleman who spoke last, has gone over such a variety of ground, and has given so large a history of the wickedness of Ministers during the American war, that the asperity with which he has delivered it, would be a sufficient reason for my silence, did I not think it necessary, from a duty I owe to this house and to my country, to give some answers to assertions which have fallen from him.

Sir,[9] to the first complaint, which the Honourable Gentleman makes, of the Minister’s concealment from the Commissioners of the removal of the troops from Philadelphia, I shall only answer, that the importance of that proceeding required the nicest secrecy, and (though I do not mean to suggest the least idea disadvantageous to the confidence of the Commissioners) it is perhaps owing to the secret decision upon that matter, that the removal of the fleet and army from the Delaware was so timely, and so effectually executed. And I will add, that (whatever opinions may have been conceived either by the Commissioners or any other persons) the events, which have since happened, amply justify the wisdom of the measure.⸺With respect to the bad policy, as some Gentlemen have called it, of opening a negotiation with a retreating army, will any one tell me, that, had your army and navy been blocked up by Mons. D’Estaign’s fleet, with the prospect of all of the latter being utterly destroyed in the Delaware, the Congress would have been more inclined to treat with your Commissioners, than when all were safe at New-York?—Were they inclined to negotiate with Lord H[o]we and Sir William H[o]we, (who had sufficient powers) at Philadelphia, after the receipt of the bills, and before the arrival of the new Commissioners?⸺No, Sir—no appearances of reconciliation on the part of the Congress were shewn at that time:—their minds, worked up by their leaders to a spirit of enthusiasm, indulged the expectation of destruction to our fleet, at least, from the powers of France.—I am free to confess, Sir, that when I heard Mons. D’Estaign had arrived in America previous to Admiral Byron, (whose fleet had been so unfortunately dispersed) I had little hopes from the temper and inclinations of the Congress, that they would be induced to treat; until some blow had been struck, and that on our part, of a successful nature.—My confidence was, and still is, Sir, in the people there at large—groaning under the worst of all tyrannies, involved in a ruinous, and, I maintain, an unsuccessful war; and driven by their corrupted leaders into a most unnatural connection with France; I say, Sir, if one spark of British sense and honour yet remains, if one drop of blood of this country still flows in the veins of the Americans, they will avail themselves of our liberality, and return to their former happy and enviable subordination to this country.

With respect to the Fleet of Victuallers, which, the Honourable Gentleman observed, had a narrow escape from the Delaware, it was supposed they had sailed from Corke, some time before the orders were sent from hence for the evacuation of Philadelphia; and it is very lucky they did not sail for New-York; for, if they had, they would have met with Monsieur D’Estaign there.

It has been urged by the Honourable Gentleman, that the American war can be no longer made offensive; and therefore, if a defensive one has been adopted, why not leave a sufficient number of troops for the defence of New-York, Rhode-Island, Halifax, and the Floridas? and strike some blow at the French Settlements in the West-Indies.—Gentlemen will recollect the little time that has elapsed since the evacuation of Philadelphia, the attack and defence of Rhode-Island, and the transactions between Lord Howe’s and D’Estaign’s Fleet, and they will see how difficult it was to be at a great many places at the same time.—With respect to Dominica, Sir, the loss of it is certainly a misfortune, but, I trust, only a temporary one. There can be no blame laid upon the Ministers for that event, because, in the very beginning of the war with France, ships were sent sufficient to make at least a superior force to the French in the West-Indies. I am aware of the force of the argument that will be made use of upon this occasion—Gentlemen will say, You have so many places and possessions to guard, that many of them must be vulnerable; and therefore it is impossible to go on in a war with France and America at the same time, with any reasonable expectations of success.—This argument will lead me to enter a little into what I conceive to be our actual situation at home and abroad.—With respect to this country, Sir, it is protected by a fleet superior to the French.—It contains, to the honour of those who have sacrificed domestic ease to public spirit, a very fine army, including the regulars, of 50,000 men.—Your ships of trade and merchandise have arrived safe and unmolested; whilst the Privateers and Letters of Marque have made considerable havock upon the property of our enemies.⸺And here I must remark upon two observations which have fallen from the Honourable Gentleman who spoke last.—The first, with respect to the number of sailors who have entered on board these ships at a time when there was so much difficulty in manning the fleet, and which is a charge of ignorance in obtaining them upon the Admiralty.—Sir, the bounty which has been given to seamen by individuals, to enter on board Privateers and Letters of Marque, has been enormous—I have been told 10 l.—15 l.—and 20 l. a-man.—This, with the expectation of the larger share of prize-money received by lesser vessels, has been a sufficient inducement to men to enter on board those ships.⸺Upon the other observation, that the prizes we have taken consist chiefly of British property, and are insured here—I shall only remark, that the Merchant here who employs French shipping and French navigation, in preference to the British, ought to suffer.—But, Sir, with respect to insurance, let us see which of the two countries suffers most on that head.—The insurance upon French ships homeward bound has been very high.—Upon the French Indiamen, I have heard, so high as 75 l. per cent.—Then, Sir, this being the case, if the Frenchman arrives safe in France, the Englishman gets 75 l. per cent.—If he is taken, he loses but 25 l. per cent. whilst his neighbour shares the prize entirely.—Surely, therefore, Sir, this country has certainly much the best of the bargain.—This, however, Sir, great as these advantages are, is no reason nor no inducement with me for continuing the war.—I am obliged to recur so often to what has been said, that I beg pardon for deviating from the chief object, at least of my consideration—that of our actual situation at home and abroad.—I have already said, Sir, that we are sufficiently defended by our navy and army at home.—We have certainly a greater superiority of both in North America—of ships in the West-Indies—superior in the East-Indies, and shall be more so when the ships now ready to proceed thither, and with troops, are arrived there.—Sir, there is wealth, I trust there is likewise spirit enough in this country, to support us even in a more embarrassing situation than the present. And, though Gentlemen may have wished to impeach the security of this country, I will fairly tell them, that, such is the confidence, even in the hour of her distress, foreigners of all nations have given, and do give, the preference to our funds;—the falling of which, immediately after the opening of the last budget, is to be imputed entirely to the jobbing of a good purchase at a low bargain, and not to a want of confidence in the nation. I could deduce many reasons to justify me in this opinion; and I could call upon the Dutch, as the best politicians, in support of it.—Nor, Sir, will I admit the prospect of ruin to be before us, until I see that the justice of our cause has left us, and that there no longer exists that zeal and bravery which have distinguished the people of Great Britain, as superior to the rest of the world⸺Sir, a great deal has been said by Gentlemen (who have in my idea gone over, unnecessarily at this time, the whole of the American war) with respect to the conduct of it.⸺I believe, even the most inveterate enemies Ministers may have, will allow that there was transported to a greater distance, than ever was known before, the finest army; that you fed and maintained it at that distance; and that, from its excellence and its superiority, you had a right to expect the most happy advantages. So far the business, as it concerned Ministry, was well transacted. But, Sir, then comes the question—were the plans and the directions to execute them wise and practicable?⸺I cannot but say, Sir, for my own part, and, as far as my Judgment went, they were so⸺I do not mean to suggest any thing invidious towards the Officers to whom commands and responsibility were delegated⸺I am not one of those who easily condemn, certainly never will, before I have just grounds for doing so⸺If our Army and Navy have not done in every part of the world what was expected of them—Parliament can enquire, can approve, or censure⸺This however appears to me but a secondary subject for our consideration.

Sir, much has been said with respect to the Union of France and America, and the probability there is that Spain will soon be a party in it. I will not rob many honourable Gentlemen of the gift of prophecy, of what Spain will do in this conjuncture; but, Sir, surely her interest and her policy should be to resist the Independance of America—She will never, by protecting rebellion in our colonies, hold out encouragement to her own to follow their example. It is idle, Sir, to indulge the idea of the Spanish settlements in South America trading with the North Americans, by purchasing, with Spanish Bullion, North American commodities. The Court of Spain is much too wise, I think, to adopt such a measure. What, Sir, might be the consequence? An intercourse and trade between the extremes of that great quarter of the globe might at last be united by a centre, and establish the greatest dominion in the World. For, time may produce daring and flagitious characters in that continent also, whose object it may be to destroy the sovereignty of Spain over her Colonists—Neither can I agree with Gentlemen in thinking, that the union of America and France can be lasting. I might as well suppose that different religions, Liberty and slavery, in short, that contrarieties can form a system, as admit that unity and harmony can ever last between France and America—Neither of the countries expect it—The one supports, and the other receives, merely for the temporary purpose of distressing Great Britain⸺France can have no thoughts of establishing herself in the Heart of America. And America will only avail herself of the assistance of France, until she is at peace with this Country.

In the mean time, however, our exertions must be of a powerful nature to resist this unnatural alliance—And here, Sir, let me return to the consideration of what is proper to be done in consequence of his M[ajes]ty’s speech.

Sir, in giving my entire approbation of what has been proposed by the Honourable Gentleman in the motion for the Address, I trust I shall be forgiven, if I submit to the House the necessity there is at this time of vigour and firmness in all our proceedings, in order to give a spirit to national exertion. And, whilst we regret that even our unanimity and liberal offers have not been productive of peaceable accommodation with America, I trust that her ingratitude may yet meet with the recompence such a conduct has deserved: in holding out this doctrine, I mean not to forget that America is still the offspring of Great Britain: that when she returns to her duty, she will be received with open arms, and all her faults be buried in oblivion.

In a word, Sir, the period is arrived, when it is no longer a question who is to be Minister, who are to compose a party, or who have been to blame. Such discussions will not probably obtain conviction on either side—The day has passed for reflexions on those who have been alledged to have given confidence to Insurgency, or on those who have been said to have provoked it. The object of your consideration is now⸺the salvation of your Country.

For myself, Sir, I shall no longer desire to remain in my own situation, than his Majesty, and this House, think I can be useful in it. If any one Man will take it from me, He will relieve me from the most anxious tasks that any Minister probably ever experienced: But, till then, Sir, I look to the support of this house, and to that of all good Men in defending and maintaining the glory and honour of Great Britain.

[Sidenote: Col. B[a]rré.]

Col. _B[a]rré_ began with recounting his predictions.—I foretold in the outset of the American contest, that your obstinacy would establish independance of the colonies. My first prophecy was, that France would join them—was I wrong?—I will boldly hazard one prediction more—I say, Spain sooner or later will join both⸺such are the allies of America.—Who are your’s? The Onandagas, the Tuscaroras, and the Choctaws! These are your copper coloured allies, that fix a stain on the name of Britain; and disgrace this country even in victory, as well as defeat—I knew of these alliances, and their barbarities, so early as the 8th of June last. I have a letter from a friend of mine at Poughkeepsie, of that date;—the Indians, headed by Col. B[u]tl[e]r, began their rapine in _Cherry Valley_; parties of _Indians and Tories_ (so my friend couples those blood-hounds of desolation) butchered the innocent inhabitants of _Sacandago_, and spread ruin and carnage through _Minisink_—I am sure, Col. B[u]tl[e]r, (who is indeed as gallant and amiable an Officer as ever I knew, and I know him well) never would have embrued his hands in innocent blood, but that he knew he must sacrifice his feelings to the speculative, I do not say practical, violence, of the American Secretary. Gen. C[a]rlt[o]n lost the Noble Lord’s favour by his abhorrence of the tomahawk and the scalping knife:—have not we tried those satanic instruments of death too long? Is the whole of Miss _Macreas_ race to be sacrificed? Not one innocent babe left unbutchered to lisp out the tale of that devoted, that unhappy family? Of whom are we now to enquire for any official documents of your war? I see no Secretary of War in this house? Does the American Secretary monopolize and consolidate all warlike business? I hope not.⸺

Sir, I beg pardon for the heat which I find rising within me—but the inexorable hour of vengeance is not far distant; the heavy load of black and bloody guilt will sink you all.—The time will come when the thunder of the cannon will be heard at your walls. Examples will be made. The Tower and the Block must expiate the crimes of Ministers. The voice of truth will be heard. The Rubicon is passed.⸺Sir, what is the comparative state of the revenues of France, and of this country? Mons. Neckar, a very able and a very amiable man, has, I understand, found taxes, and not oppressive ones, for two years;—is that a fact?—The revenue of this country is diminished—it has been gradually so during this detestable war—will Ministers deny it? Good God, Sir, what a state are we in? Dominica lost!—Sir, Monsieur Bouillé was once my particular friend—Sir, he is returned to France for fresh powers and orders—look to your West-India settlements, callous as we are, we cannot bear the loss of them.

Sir, I am astonished at the blind credulity of Ministry—can they be so very simple as to trust to vague compliments against those decisive words of the Pacte de Famille, the Family Compact, “Qui attaque une couronne attaque l’autre;” (I translate for the country Gentlemen) whoever attacks one crown attacks the other.⸺I know Count Almodovar—I was introduced to him by my old friend, Don Francisco Buccarelli:—I never shall forget dining with him at a kind of Table d’Hotes, in a tavern opposite the Escurial;—as chance would have it, many more illustrious characters dined with us that day; there was the Count, his wife’s cousin, and myself, on one side of the table;—Count Cobentzel, and Baron Reidesdel (who were then on their travels) and Duke de Chartres (who had just come from Paris) sat opposite to us—Monsieur de Sartine (who came in the Duke’s vis a vis) was at the foot of the table; and we put Buccarelli in the chair⸺we had an excellent dinner—the wine was good—and we toasted the Madrid beauties in bumpers of Packeretti—however, I was not so far gone but I can very well remember what Almodovar whispered in my ear, while _Cobentzel and Reidsdale_ were drinking Maxamilian Joseph of Bavaria’s health. Colonel (says he) _Il alte se volto Estremadura che molto_—I won’t translate it. I feel the respect due to Ambassadors.—But, will Ministry answer a plain question? I put it roundly, because I ask for a positive answer—Is there no treaty now on the tapis to cede Gibraltar, or Port Mahon?—I say, the neutrality of Spain is to be trucked for by the dismembring this country of its best possessions.—Here he proceeded to read variety of Gazettes, American News-papers, two or three Treaties, letters from gallant Officers in all parts of the world; accounts of Cl[i]nt[o]n’s retreat; transactions of Lord H[o]we, and Mons. D’Estaign; Alderman Oliver’s letter—affair at Rhode Island, &c. &c. &c. He went also into a string of similar surmises, recognized various intimates in Europe, Asia, Africa, and America, and interspersed the whole with a multiplicity of anecdotes, proverbs, quotations, menaces and bon mots—concluding, that having then read to the house all the various papers he himself could collect, he found it necessary to give his vote for the Amendment, as the only way to get at more.

[Sidenote: Mr H. St[anle]y.]

Mr. H. _St[anle]y_ observed, that many Gentlemen had deviated from the business immediately before the house, which, in his opinion, was merely this: Whether this house will or will not support his M[ajest]y, and the executive powers of government, in the endeavours to recal the Americans to obedience, and to punish the natural enemies of this country?[10] That his own opinion was determined by a conviction of the necessity, in this hour of difficulty and distress, for exertion and firmness. Much has been said of the wealth and resources of France in comparison of those of England. I can only say, Sir, from all the observations I have been able to make, that France is, with respect to its finances, certainly an impoverished country. It has not yet recovered the impression made by the last war; and, whatever Gentlemen may think, neither Mons. Neckar (whom I very much respect) nor any other person, will be able, at least for a great length of time, to overturn the old mode of attainment of French money; I mean, Sir, by the vehicle of the _Fermeurs Generaux_. It must be a minister of great courage indeed, and a King of Terrors, that will new model the French finances; new taxes may be imposed, but I much doubt of the collection of them. When a good contract has been long in possession, it is too sweet to resign easily; and the _Fermeurs Genereaux_ are too important to be offended, especially, when the state is necessitated to have recourse to their assistance. In saying this, I give full credit to Mons. Neckar for his attempt to improve the revenue of France, and that too, when the attempt is surrounded with so much difficulty and danger.⸺The revenue of this country, Sir, has not suffered by the American war; the surpluses of the sinking fund, are as great as during the state of perfect peace with America. Other countries have taken from us those manufactures which we exported before with bounties to America.

As I think Britain is still equal to resist, and, I trust, to subdue all its Enemies, I am clearly for the Motion which has been proposed, and seconded, by the honourable Gentlemen, with so much credit to themselves, and with so particular a desert of the approbation of their Country.

[Sidenote: Gen. C[o]n[wa]y.]

_Gen. C[o]n[wa]y._ Mr. Sp[eake]r, I beg pardon for troubling the House with one short word, Sir, at this late hour of the night, Sir, when there are many Gentlemen very desirous⸺and much more capable than I am, of speaking—upon so material—so important—so comprehensive a business—I may say, Sir—as that which now immediately comes before us—for our deliberation.⸺In doing this, Sir—in offering my poor sentiments—upon this matter, Sir⸺I own, I feel some degree of warmth, at the supineness—at the coolness—I may say—of the Ministers in so dangerous—so hazardous—and, God knows, probably so destructive an hour⸺And, Sir, I hope I may suggest my thoughts at so critical a period, when, indeed, all Europe and America are convulsed—and shaken—by the imbecillity, the inattention, and the indecision of Ministers; who have so supinely, so cooly, and so indecisively sat _with their hands before them_, waiting for events—and contingencies⸺In saying this, Sir,—I mean not to throw any reflexion upon any of them—Most of them I know to be men of honour and ability—but, Sir, I beg pardon, Sir, for taking up the time of the house, Sir; I think the moment is past when any system can prevail, I mean on the part of this country over America. Your West-India Islands are unprotected—Dominica is gone—Who knows but Jamaica is gone too? What force have you at Antigua? I understand, Admiral Barrington is gone from Barbadoes. What is to become of St. Vincents and Grenada? Good God! Sir, will the Nation sit still under these apprehensions? Have Ministers taken care of Ireland? Does the Noble Lord underneath me know the state of Guernsey and Jersey? Will they be able to resist Count Broglio with 50,000 men? Is your force, particularly at Jersey, equal to resistance—Sir, at this moment, I tremble for Jersey.[11]⸺

In one short word, Sir, I beg pardon—I do trust in God, Sir ... in the King ... Sir, and in the spirit of this unhappy Nation, Sir, that we shall be relieved from these dreadful apprehensions, and difficulties, and that we shall see once more, Peace, Harmony, and Wisdom, resume their order in this country, in the stead of weakness, irresolution, wavering folly, absurd doubts, and indecision, Sir.

[Sidenote: Mr S[aw]b[rid]ge.]

Mr _S[aw]b[rid]ge_⸺Example—impeachment—axes—Tower—blood—Sister Mac[au]ly—republicanism—Washington, greatest man in the World—will be heard—tyranny at Warley-Common—militia men turned to road-pioneers—undermining trees—sand in bread—waste of powder—Middlesex election—vast expence of flints—triennial parliaments—body politic—ill humours—state-surgeons—example—axes—Tower—blood⸺_Da Capo_.

The question being now called for with most violent impatience, the House prepared to divide.⸺The Editor cannot but lament that the eloquence of the day is compriseable in so small a compass.—He regrets, with many others, the silence of those who might have been supposed, from attachment, from principle, and a sense of honour, to have taken a more decided part in the debate. Probably it might be considered too severe to impute the conduct of those Gentlemen to the precariousness of the times, to the expectation of new Administrations, or to the fretfulness of an insatiable avarice of wealth and power.

Little more remains to add, than that the House having become very clamorous for a division, at half past three the question on the Amendment being put, the motion was rejected by a majority of 261 to 148. Tellers for the Ayes, Mr T. T[ownshe]nd and Mr B[y]ng—for the Noes, Sir G[re]y C[oope]r and Mr C[harles] T[ownshe]nd.⸺The main question being then put, the original Address was carried in nearly the same proportion.

* * * * *

Immediately after the division, the H[ous]e were much astonished at Mr C[harle]s T[u]rn[e]r’s calling their attention to a most libellous, nefarious, and enormous pamphlet, entitled _Anticipation_, calculated to misrepresent the debates, and vilify the proceedings of P[arliamen]t; observing, that the publication of Honourable Gentlemen’s speeches _before_ they could possibly have been spoken, was infinitely more dangerous to the constitution than mistaking them after they had actually been delivered; as not only the public were thereby much more likely to be deceived, but many country Gentlemen were most illegally hurried up to town before the time, to the great annoyance of themselves and cattle. Besides, what struck at the very heart-strings of debate, many good speeches were marred thereby, and Honourable Gentlemen stopt from repeating their own words, lest they should authenticate the said publication.

For all which reasons, he humbly moved, that the Publisher of a pamphlet, entitled, _Anticipation_, be immediately taken into custody by a Messenger of this House, together with all papers in his shops and warehouses, in order that this House may be enabled to discover the Author or Authors of this very black conspiracy. He moved also, that the several statutes against forgery, coining, and uttering, knowing to be false, forestallers, and regraters, &c. &c. be forthwith all read. And further⸺But, the laughter having now become intense, the remnant of his oratory was cut short by a most clamorous repetition of _Adjourn_, _Adjourn_; so that it was impossible for the Editor to collect the result of this important motion.

And then the House adjourned till the morning, nine of the clock.

FINIS.

FOOTNOTES

[1] It was observed the S[peake]r was remarkable civil to the new Att[o]rn[e]y G[e]n[e]r[a]l, as supposed upon his succeeding to that great object of his wishes, which leaves Sir F[letche]r some chance of a Chief Justiceship and a Peerage.

[2] Exempli gratiâ, for whether it is his Lordship’s Speech, or Lord J. C[a]v[e]nd[i]sh’s, or Sir W. M[e]r[e]dith’s, or Sir G. Y[ou]ng’s, &c. the subject matter and stile, with a few exceptions, is of course much the same.

[3] Here Mr. B[a]mb[e]r G[a]sc[oy]ne headed the dinner troop, which followed him with great precipitation—at the same time departed Sir John Irw[i]n and Mr. S[e]lw[y]n, with his Honour Mr. Br[u]d[e]n[e]ll, of whom great enquiries were made, respecting the present arrangements of the Opera.—Nor were there wanting many cries for the question.

[4] Here Sir GR[E]Y C[OO]P[E]R caught at a pen, and began to take notes.

[5] Probably, from supposing the first origin of their connection to have arisen (at least on the part of Dr. Franklyn) from a philosophical rather than a political curiosity. And certainly, no two projectors in Science were ever more strikingly contrasted: the one, like a modern Prometheus, collecting fire from vapour to inflame the terrestrial mass by its pernicious infusion: the other employing his magic _plates_ to freeze its ardour and quench its malignity.—Happy for this country, if these professors had shifted their pursuits! as the former, could his inclinations have been propitious to the peace of mankind, might then have become a powerfull _Extinguisher_, while the other, however malignant his intentions, must always have been acknowledged an _innocent_ Incendiary.

[6] The Editor was furnished with copies of this speech from the Printers of the respective News Papers, many weeks ago.

[7] Gentlemen were here desired by the Sp[ea]k[e]r to take their seats, and the Serjeant to clear the bar—places! places! was repeated with great vehemence.

[8] As the Noble Lord was almost the only Speaker on the side of Administration, the Editor felt it the duty of impartiality, after giving so many excellent speeches on the opposite side, to collect this with particular accuracy, which he was the better enabled to do, from the deliberate manner of its being delivered, and the respectful attention with which it was received.

[9] Here Lord N[o]rth took up Sir G[re]y C[oo]p[e]r’s notes.

[10] Whilst Mr. St[anle]y was speaking, Mr. B[yn]g was making numerical criticisms on the state of the House, which Mr. R[o]b[i]ns[o]n had done before, with his usual assiduity; and had taken his place at the door accordingly.

[11] N.B. G[enera]l C[onwa]y is Governor of it.—Query, Whether he had not better be there at this dangerous crisis?

NOTES

NOTES

PAGE 22

_The Gentlemen trading to the East-Indies, &c._ The publisher’s advertisement burlesques a practice of the bookseller John Almon (1737-1805), friend and biographer of John Wilkes, and between the years 1761-81 publisher-in-ordinary to the Whig Opposition. Almon had extensive connections in the American colonies and was the compiler of _The Remembrancer_, 1775-84, a valuable collection of materials relating to the Revolution. In his satire on the French ministry, _The Green Box of Monsieur de Sartine_, 1779, Tickell represents a French spy in London reporting ruefully:

News-papers, pamphlets, parliamentary debates, remembrancers,
and all the infinite variety of periodical libels, under the
conduct of our good friend Mr. Almon, leave but a scanty and
beaten field of politics for private discovery (pp. 12-13).

PAGE 23

_Sir Francis Molyneux._ Sir Francis Molyneux (d. 1812), Knt.; succeeded his father as seventh Baronet, 1781.

_the Speaker._ Sir Fletcher Norton (1716-1789), Knt.; M.P. for Guildford; Speaker of the House of Commons, 1770-80; cr. Baron Grantley of Markenfield, 1782.

_the merit of those speeches._ Since the speech from the throne rarely contains more than generalities, Tickell was able to approximate its substance fairly closely. In the debate on the opening day John Wilkes had the temerity to say that there were only two particulars in the King’s speech to which he could assent: “They are, that we are called together in a conjuncture, which demands our most serious attention, and that a restoration of the blessings of peace ought to be our first wish” (_Parliamentary History_, XIX, 1334).

_the new Attorney General._ Alexander Wedderburn (1733-1805), M.P. for Bishop’s Castle; succeeded Edward Thurlow as Attorney-General, June 1778; elevated to the Chief Justiceship of the Common Pleas as Baron Loughborough of Loughborough, 1780; cr. Earl of Rosslyn, 1801. In the spring of 1778 Sir Fletcher Norton, by a threat of impeachment, had blocked Wedderburn’s intrigue to obtain the Chief Justiceship; see Walpole to Mason, 31 May 1778 (_Letters_, ed. Toynbee, X, 254).

PAGE 25

_Lord Granby._ Charles Manners (1754-1787), second son of the Marquis of Granby famous as a military hero; M.P. for Cambridge University; succeeded his grandfather as fourth Duke of Rutland, 1779.

_Pulteny._ Sir William Pulteney (1684-1764), Earl of Bath; long the leader of the “patriot” opposition during Sir Robert Walpole’s administration, but politically ruined by his acceptance, upon Walpole’s fall, of an earldom.

_Cavendish ... Meredith ... Young._ Three supporters of the Whig Opposition: John Cavendish (1732-1796), fourth son of the third Duke of Devonshire, M.P. for York, friend and correspondent of Burke; Sir William Meredith (1725?-1790), third Baronet, M.P. for Liverpool; Sir George Yonge (1731-1812), fifth Baronet, M.P. for Honiton.

PAGE 26

_that inestimable character of our own times._ William Pitt (1708-1778), first Earl of Chatham. The “Great Commoner’s” acceptance of a peerage in 1766 occasioned a storm of popular indignation.

PAGE 27

_Admiral Keppel ... Vice Admiral Sir Hugh Palliser._ Augustus Keppel (1725-1786), second son of the second Earl of Albemarle; M.P. for Windsor; Admiral of the Blue and Commander-in-Chief of the Grand Fleet, 1778; cr. Viscount Keppel, 1782. Sir Hugh Palliser (1723-1796), first Baronet; M.P. for Scarborough and a Lord of the Admiralty; Vice-Admiral of the Blue, 1778.

The allusions are to the indecisive action off Ushant between the Channel fleet under Keppel, with Palliser as third in command, and the Brest fleet under D’Orvilliers, 27 July 1778; see Introduction, p. 10. On the third day of the session an altercation broke out in the House of Commons between the two admirals, and a few days later Palliser applied to his colleagues at the Admiralty Board for a court-martial on Keppel. After a protracted trial the court declared Palliser’s charges “malicious and ill-founded.” This verdict so delighted the populace that street riots ensued in which the Admiralty was attacked and Palliser’s house in Pall-Mall was gutted. Palliser was obliged to resign all his public appointments. See Sir G. O. Trevelyan, _George the Third and Charles James Fox: The Concluding Part of the American Revolution_, New York, 1912-14, I, ch. v.

_Philip Stevens, Esq._ Philip Stephens (1723-1809), M.P. for Sandwich and First Secretary to the Admiralty; cr. a baronet, 1795.

PAGE 28

_Mr. George Sutton._ George Manners-Sutton (1751-1804), nephew of the famous Marquis of Granby; M.P. for Newark.

_Mr. Welbore Ellis._ Welbore Ellis (1713-1802), M.P. for Weymouth and Treasurer of the Navy; cr. Baron Mendip of Mendip, 1794; see Introduction, p. 12.

PAGE 29

_David Hartly, Esq._ David Hartley the younger (1732-1813), son of the philosopher; M.P. for Kingston-upon-Hull; published _Letters on the American War_, 1777-79, which critically reviewed the history of British colonial policy; friend and correspondent of Franklin (whose letters he sometimes read in the House of Commons); British plenipotentiary at Paris to negotiate peace with America, 1783. He was the Cassandra of the House and a tireless advocate of peace, but his long-windedness made him disliked. In _The Abbey of Kilkhampton_, 1780, Sir Herbert Croft’s satirical garland of epitaphs, Hartley’s epitaph reads as follows (Part II, p. 124):

Here rests,
If we may trust the Silence of his Grave,
D.... H....y, Esq.
His abilities were the Subject of Admiration, and the
public Utility was the generous Object they had
in view,
But⸺he was _troublesome_.

_Mr. Bamber Gascoyne._ Bamber Gascoyne (1725-1791), M.P. for Truro and a Lord of Trade and Plantations. Of this footnote and the speech by Hartley, _The London Magazine_ observed:

The description of a certain fat member heading the dinner
troop and drawing them out of the house, upon a dry,
metaphysical, long winded speaker getting up, is truly
characteristic; and strangers frequenting the gallery may
congratulate themselves on this happy stroke, for it has partly
silenced the tedious declaimer, who never considered that if
each speaker claimed the same right, to pay no regard to time,
a whole session might be passed in adjourned debates from
_three_ in the afternoon to _three_ in the morning, day after
day (XLVII, 566).

_Sir John Irwin._ Sir John Irwin (1728-1788), K.B.; M.P. for East Grinstead; Major-General and Commander-in-Chief in Ireland; famous for his sartorial elegance and convivial habits.

_Mr. Selwyn._ George Augustus Selwyn (1719-1791), M.P. for Gloucester; the celebrated wit and club-man. Though he sat in Parliament for about thirty years, Selwyn was notoriously apathetic towards politics. But since he returned two members besides himself, and always woke up in time to give his vote for the ministers when a division was called, Selwyn was amply rewarded by successive administrations. He was, wrote Sir George Otto Trevelyan,

at one and the same time surveyor-general of crown lands—which
he never surveyed—registrar in chancery at Barbadoes—which he
never visited—and surveyor of the meltings and clerk of the
irons in the mint—where he showed himself once a week in order
to eat a dinner which he ordered, but for which the nation paid
(_The Early History of Charles James Fox_, New York, 1881, pp.
94-95).

_his Honour Mr. Brudenell._ James Brudenell (1725-1811), second son of the third Earl of Cardigan; M.P. for Marlborough; cr. Baron Brudenell of Deene, 1780; succeeded his brother as fifth Earl of Cardigan, 1790.

PAGE 30

_Mr. Wilkes._ John Wilkes (1727-1797), M.P. for Middlesex; the radical politician and hero of the London populace. He had a reputation for facetious wit, and he made a practice of sending his speeches in advance to the newspapers. Wilkes was another, like Fox and Burke, who enjoyed Tickell’s anticipation of his speech. Boswell reported Wilkes as saying to Tickell in April 1779: “Much obliged for your speech for me. If you’ll make me another for next session, I’ll be damn’d if I don’t speak it” (_Private Papers of James Boswell_, XIII, 231).

_Here Sir Grey Cooper caught at a pen._ Sir Grey Cooper (1726?-1801), third Baronet; M.P. for Saltash and a Secretary of the Treasury. The allusion is to Lord North’s habit of sleeping through Whig speeches and answering them from the notes of his favorite secretary. The following lines are from _The London Magazine_, XLVIII, 1779, 186:

Whilst B[ur]ke and B[arr]é strain their throats
The mild SIR GREY is taking notes;
And, wise as owl, is seen _composing_,
For the good Premier, who is _dozing_:
Whilst to each patriot’s loudest roar
N[or]th answers with a well-tim’d _snore_.
Till by some shriller trebles vex’d,
He discants on the _good Knight’s_ text.

_magic plates._ Hartley had invented an arrangement of thin iron strips to be placed as a lining under floors and above ceilings to prevent fire. An anonymous handbill of four quarto pages, dated July 1776 and called _An Account of Some Experiments Made with the Fire-Plates, Together with a Description of the Manner of Application, and an Estimate of the Expence_, contains newspaper accounts of unsuccessful attempts to burn a house near Reading equipped with Hartley’s plates.

PAGE 31

_the Noble Lord, who presided in the American department._ George Sackville Germain (1716-1785), called Lord George Germain, third son of the first Duke of Dorset; M.P. for East Grinstead and Secretary of State for Colonies; cr. Viscount Sackville, 1782. As minister in charge of military operations in America, Germain bore the brunt of frequent and savage onslaughts by Opposition. His famous Kentish holiday, which delayed dispatches to Sir William Howe in New York, was long supposed to have caused Burgoyne’s defeat at Saratoga; Lord Edmond Fitzmaurice, _Life of William, Earl of Shelburne_, 1875-76, I, 358-359; but cf. Troyer Steele Anderson, _The Command of the Howe Brothers during the American Revolution_, New York, 1936, ch. xiv. Germain’s resignation was forced in January 1782, two months before North’s government fell.

_the Earl of Bute._ John Stuart (1713-1792), third Earl of Bute; favorite of George III in the early years of the reign; First Lord of the Treasury, 1762-63, but forced to resign on account of his unpopularity, to which the anti-Scots propaganda of Wilkes largely contributed. Lord North was popularly regarded as the political heir of Lord Bute.

PAGE 32

_one North Briton._ George Johnstone; see last note on this page.

_Mr. Laurens._ Henry Laurens (1724-1792), of South Carolina; President of Congress, 1777-78. The quoted phrases that follow are from Johnstone’s letter to Laurens, 10 June 1778, soliciting a private interview. This letter, with Laurens’ answer, was promptly made public by Congress.

_Ethan Allen._ Ethan Allen (1738-1789), famous for his partisan exploits as leader of the Green Mountain Boys of Vermont; surprised and took Fort Ticonderoga, May 1775; a captive in England, Canada, and New York, September 1775-May 1778; author of a deistic treatise, _Reason the Only Oracle of Man_, Bennington, Vermont, 1784.

_Dr. Adam Ferguson._ Adam Ferguson (1723-1816), LL.D.; Professor of Pneumatics and Moral Philosophy at the University of Edinburgh; secretary to the British commissioners to treat with America, 1778.

_Sir John Dalrymple._ Sir John Dalrymple (1726-1810), fourth Baronet; author of the Tory _Memoirs of Great Britain and Ireland_. _From the Dissolution of the Last Parliament of Charles II until the Sea-Battle off La Hogue_, 1771, the design of which (according to Horace Walpole) was “to degrade & blacken the brightest names in English Story, & more particularly the Protomartyrs of the Revolution, Lord Russel & Algernon Sydney” (_Satirical Poems Published Anonymously by William Mason with Notes by Horace Walpole_, ed. Paget Toynbee, Oxford, 1926, p. 115).

_the great Sidney._ Algernon Sidney (1622-1683), son of the second Earl of Leicester; tried before Jeffreys and executed, December 1683, for complicity in the Rye House Plot to murder Charles II and the Duke of York.

_Governor Johnson._ George Johnstone (1730-1787), M.P. for Appleby; formerly Governor of West Florida; one of North’s commissioners to treat with America; see Introduction, p. 9. His conduct as commissioner was quarrelsome, clumsy, and ineffectual; Carl Van Doren, _Secret History of the American Revolution_, New York, 1941, pp. 96-104. Of his speech on the opening day of the session Walpole reported:

Governor Johnston made a strange, unintelligible speech (it
was impossible for him to make a clear one without condemning
himself); he endeavoured to wipe off some of his attempt to
bribe some of the Congress, yet owned at much as he denied,
condemned and approved the march to Philadelphia, and rather
insinuated blame on Keppel than on anybody else. He was soon
after called upon in several newspapers to say, whether he did
not still retain his pay of Commissioner, though he had so long
quitted the office. He made no answer—consequently was by that
sinecure retained by the Court (_Last Journals_, II, 209).

PAGE 33

_Mons. D’Estaign._ Jean-Baptiste-Charles-Henri-Hector, Comte d’Estaing (1729-1794), French admiral in command in American waters, 1778-80.

_a noble Lord opposite to me._ Richard, Lord Howe; see below, note to p. 34.

_D’Estaign’s fleet ought to have been attacked._ In August Howe pursued D’Estaing to Newport, but a storm prevented an engagement.

PAGE 34

_Byron’s squadron._ John Byron (1723-1786), Vice-Admiral; sailed from Plymouth with a squadron in pursuit of D’Estaing, June 1778; his ships joined Howe’s fleet piecemeal during the summer.

_Lord Howe._ Richard Howe (1726-1799), fourth Viscount Howe in the peerage of Ireland; M.P. for Dartmouth; Vice-Admiral; Commander-in-Chief on the North American station, 1776-78; resigned his command because of discontent with the ministry, September 1778; cr. an English peer, 1782, and Earl Howe, 1788.

_Mr. Rigby._ Richard Rigby (1722-1788), M.P. for Tavistock and Paymaster of the Forces. Reputed to have derived immense profits from his office during the American war, Rigby served as the model for Disraeli’s corrupt politician of the same name in _Coningsby_, 1844.

PAGE 35

_Mr. T. Townsend._ Thomas Townshend (1733-1800), nephew of the third Viscount Townshend; M.P. for Whitchurch, 1754-83; cr. Baron Sydney of Chislehurst, 1783, and Viscount Sydney, 1789, the city in Australia being named for him. He was one of the most voluble and pertinacious speakers in debates. His contemptuous reference in the House of Commons to Johnson’s pension earned Townshend a passing glance in Goldsmith’s _Retaliation_, where Burke is said to be,

Though fraught with all learning, yet straining his throat
To persuade Tommy Townshend to lend him a vote.

PAGE 36

_the blunders of Administration, with respect to Falkland’s Islands, &c._ Townshend views with alarm an assortment of the events, momentous and trivial, that had agitated the public mind in the preceding decade.

As to _Falkland’s Islands_, west of the southern tip of South America, a dispute over their possession nearly brought on war between Great Britain and Spain in 1770-71. After a display of force by Spain and a demand for restitution by the British government, diplomatic exchanges resulted in a conciliation that was unpopular in England (_The Annual Register_ for 1771, “History of Europe,” chs. i-v). At the request of the ministers, Dr. Johnson wrote a spirited defence of their conduct, _Thoughts on the Late Transactions respecting Falkland’s Islands_, 1771.

The _Middlesex Election_ was a remarkable exploit in the career of John Wilkes, who in 1768 returned from France still an outlaw for his offence in _North Briton_ No. 45, and was elected to Parliament for the county of Middlesex. Expelled before he could take his seat, he was thrice re-elected and as many times expelled. After his fourth victory at the polls Parliament declared his opponent, the ministerial candidate, duly elected. This breach of electoral rights led to street-rioting, protracted debates in and out of Parliament, and, eventually, the formation of a Radical party. See Horace Bleackley, _Life of John Wilkes_, 1917, chs. xii-xiii.

The revolt of _Corsica_ under Pasquale Paoli against the French, who had purchased the island from Genoa in 1768, won wide public sympathy in England. The leading advocate of British intervention in favor of the Corsicans was James Boswell. See Chauncey Brewster Tinker, _Nature’s Simple Plan_, Princeton, 1922, ch. ii.

The _massacre in St. George’s Fields_, 10 May 1768, occurred when a crowd of London citizens waiting for Wilkes to attend the opening of Parliament taunted a detachment of foot-guards into firing on them. Several persons were killed and about a dozen wounded. This “massacre” was the forerunner and partly the inspiration of that in King Street, Boston, two years later.

_Mr. Horne’s imprisonment_ resulted from the zeal of that radical parson in the cause of America. The Rev. John Horne (1736-1812), afterwards Horne Tooke, wrote and circulated an advertisement for the Constitutional Society, June 1775, stating that 100_l._ was to be raised for “the relief of the widows, orphans, and aged parents of our beloved American fellow-subjects, who, faithful to the character of Englishmen, preferring death to slavery, were, for that reason only, inhumanly murdered by the king’s troops” at Lexington and Concord on the 19th of April. In July 1777 Horne was brought to trial before Lord Mansfield, found guilty, and in November sentenced to a year’s imprisonment and a fine of 200_l._ (_The Annual Register_ for 1777, “Appendix to the Chronicle,” pp. 234-245).

The _fatal example of the Justitia_ is an allusion to the _Justitia_ hulk, a convict-ship stationed at Woolwich by an act of 1776 for the purpose of dredging the Thames.

The _frequent exhibition of the Beggar’s Opera_ evidently alludes to remarks by Townshend that had excited mirth in a debate on a bill for licensing a play-house in Birmingham, 29 April 1777. Townshend opposed the bill because, he said,

He had heard from good authority that the theatre licensed at
Manchester, in consequence of a similar application, had done
a great deal of mischief already: nor could it be wondered
at, if we consider what pieces are sometimes represented,
which, not being new, are not subject to the controul of the
Lord Chamberlain: the Beggar’s Opera, for instance, which had
brought more unhappy people to the gallows, than any one thing
he could name. As to the country gentlemen, surely this was
not such an age of domestic retirement, but what they might
find sufficient amusement in visiting their neighbours in the
summer, without wanting to frequent a theatre.... Considering,
then, the circumstances of Birmingham as a great manufacturing
and trading town, depending on the industry and frugality of
the poorer class of people, he was of opinion it would be
highly improper to license any theatre there (_Parliamentary
History_, XIX, 202).

_Is Omiah to pay us another visit?_ Omiah or Omai, a native of Otaheite (Tahiti), was brought to England in 1774 by Captain Tobias Furneaux of the _Adventure_. As the first South Sea Islander ever seen in England, Omiah made a stir in fashionable and literary society, sat for his portrait to the most eminent artists, and was the subject of countless newspaper paragraphs and several pamphlet poems. There are well-known lines by Cowper on Omiah in the first book of _The Task_, 1785:

The dream is past; and thou hast found again
Thy cocoas and bananas, palms and yams,
And homestall thatch’d with leaves. But hast thou found
Their former charms? And, having seen our state,
Our palaces, our ladies, and our pomp
Of equipage, our gardens, and our sports,
And heard our music; are thy simple friends,
Thy simple fare, and all thy plain delights,
As dear to thee as once?

_Sir Harry Clinton._ Sir Henry Clinton (1738?-1795), K.B.; Major-General; succeeded Sir William Howe as Commander-in-Chief in America, May 1778.

PAGE 37

_Mr. Vyner._ Robert Vyner (1717-1799), M.P. for Lincoln. He was, said Nathaniel Wraxall, a gentleman of large property in Lincolnshire, whose person suggested “the portraits of ‘Hudibras’” (_Historical and Posthumous Memoirs ... 1772-1784_, ed. H. B. Wheatley, 1884, V, 203).

_his offer of fifteen shillings in the pound._ In a debate on the budget, 3 May 1775, Vyner defended the motives of the country gentlemen in supporting the ministers’ coercive American policy. He said, in part: