administration in remitting the money to the emperor, and contended, that an attempt to delay the fupplies for the year on that account was not defenfible upon rational grounds.

Mr. Fox, in his reply, faid, that the real queftion was, whether the conduct of the minifter with regard to this money fent to the emperor, was, or was not, an infraction of the conftitution: if it was an infraction of the conftitution (which he thought no one could deny), then it was an actual invasion and ufurpation of the powers of the reprefentatives of the people, in the most important of all their privileges, that of granting money. At length the houfe divided on the question, that the word "to morrow" be inferted, instead of "now." Ayes 58-Noes 164. The refolutions were then agreed

to.

The fame fubject was difcuffed again in the house of commons on the 14th of December, after Mr. Long had brought up fome papers from the treasury, containing the correspondence which paffed between Mr. Long and Mr. Boyd, concerning the money advanced to the emperor; together with an account of the intereft paid by his imperial majefty upon the loan of four millions and a half.

Mr. Fox, upon this occafion, retraced with fome additional energy all the arguments which he had enforced on a former day, against the unconstitutional measure which the minifter had adopted of remitting money to the emperor without the knowledge or permiffion of parliament. He fupported his arguments by an appropriate quotation from Mr. Hatfell's Precedents of Proceedings in the Houfe of Commons, by which it appeared, that

formerly thofe fums of money which had been expended, but not fpecified, commonly called extraordinaries, were confined within fome limits, as appeared from the account entered in the journals during the war of the fucceffion, and even in the war which terminated in 1748. In what was commonly called the German war, these fums first became very large; but in the American war they exceeded all bounds; thefe extraordinaries very often amounted to almost as much as the whole fums voted by parliament upon the estimates; nay, in the year 1782, they appear to have actually exceeded them. It was therefore incumbent upon the houfe of commons, not only to make this fupply as fmall as poffible, but, in a fubfequent fellion, to enquire into the particular expenditure of this fum. Mr. Fox concluded a fpeech of great length, by a motion to the following purport: "That bis majesty's minifters, having at different times, without the confent, and during the fitting of parliament, directed the ilue of various fums of money for the fervice of his imperial majefty, and alfo for the fervice of the army under the prince of Condé, have acted contrary to their duty, and to the truft repofed in them, and have thereby violated the conftitutional privileges of this houfe."

Mr. alderman Combe feconded the motion, he said, in obedience to the infiructions of his constituents, who had met that day in the common hall of the city of London, and had defired their repre- . fentatives to cenfure the conduct of minifters, in granting away the public money without the confent of parliament. He alfo obferved, that the difcounting of the bills

drawn

drawn for the purpose of remitting money to the imperial troops, had fwallowed up fo much of the cath of the bank, as to compel that great body to narrow their difcounts; and the British merchants were made to fuffer, that the German foldiers might be fupplied.

The chancellor of the exchequer faid, that it was no fmall fatisfaction to him, that the full review of former precedents, with refpect to the motion then before the houfe, formed the chief ground of the argument, and that thofe precedents concurred in justifying the measure at that moment fo feverely condemned. Refpecting what had fallen from alderman Combe, he contended, that it was impoffible for his confituents to decide, in a juft and candid manner, on the propriety of giving a vote on a motion with the particulars of which they must have been unacquainted, and alfo ignorant of the defence which his majefty's minifters meant to fet up. Mr. Pitt then went at confiderable length into a defence of the measure in question, in which he followed the fame train of arguments as on the 8th of December; and concluded with quoting a number of precedents both before and after the date of the revolution, on which he appeared to reft his principal defence. In 1701, he faid, parliament had voted an extra fum for the payment of foreign forces, not regularly as a vote of credit, but fubfequent to fuch a vote. In the reign of Anne, in 1704-5, both fubfidies and grants had been employed in paying foreign forces without the authority of parliament. In 1706, he added, a tranfaction fimilar to that under difcuffion was publicly avowed. In 1718, an inftance also occurred, which, however, he admitted was not fo analagous to the late tranf

action as the preceding. In the years 1734 and 1735, votes of credit were granted, and applied according to the exigencies of the times. An advance to the duke of Aremberg in 1742 was noticed in debate, and cenfured in the adminiftration of Mr. Pelham; but the enquiry was avoided by the previous queftion. Laftly, he appealed to his own adminiftration in 1787, when the expences incurred in protelling Holland were recognized under the head of fecret fervices.

Mr. Bragge followed the minister in order, and in a great degree alfo in argument, and concluded by propofing an amendment to the motion, purporting "That advancing the feveral fums of money in the account then before the house, for the fervice of his imperial majesty (though not to be drawn into precedent but upon occafions of fpecial neceflity), was a juftifiable exercife, under the circumstances of the cafe, of the difcretion vested in his majesty's minifters by the vote of credit."

Mr. alderman Lufhington declared, that he should not have risen but for the meeting of his conftituents, alluded to by Mr. Combe; but he could never confent to receive iuftructions to fupport a motion for cenfuring minifters before he had heard their defence. It had been faid, that the conftitution had been violated; the papers on the table would prove the contrary. In times of difficulty he thought the hands of government ought to be ftrengthened; and, in this inftance, he was firft inclined to think a bill of inden nity would have been proper, but he had fince heard enough to convince him that it was not neceffary.

Alderman Curtis and alderman Anderson, the other city members, coincided with the last speaker, and fupported

fupported the minister in contradiation to the refolutions of their conftituents.

Mr. Sheridan, in a long and energetic fpeech, fupported the motion for cenfuring the minifters. Mr. Bragge, be faid, the mover of the amendment, appeared to have formed a determination to turn every expreflion of cenfure into a teftimony of approbation. His motion did not at all refer to the fums fentabroad to the army of Condé; if it exempted that part of the meafure which concerned the emperor from cenfure, it left the other to ftand upon the journals with the brand which was implied from its being paffed over without notice, while the other was held up to approbation. He would not enter into the enquiry, whether or not the power of granting fupplies, and controul ing their application, was as ancient as the government itself, and coeval with the existence of the conftitution. This falutary power arofe from the abufes of government, from the mifconduct of miaifters, from tyranny, and from corruption. The reign of Charles the Second abounded with examples of this corruption; at the revolution the right of the parliament to grant fupplies, and controul their application, was folemnly recognized, and fince that period interwoven with its ufage. In this review he wondered at the ftrefs which had been laid upon the precedents which had been quoted: it was arguing from the exception against the rule; it was erecting the deviation into the guide. Here Mr. Sheridan contended, that even thefe precedents did not apply to the prefent cafe. The firit which had the remoteft fimilarity to it, was that in 1706, of the advance to the duke of Savoy, to the amount of

47,000l. This fum was granted, during the recefs of parliament, to an ally of this country, placed in perilous circumftances, when his capital of Turin was actually in a ftate of fiege. A demand was made for 50,000l. and the letter which Mr. fecretary Harley fent in anfwer to the ambaffador of Savoy, stated, that it was not practicable according to the custom of the conftitution while parliament was not fitting, to comply with the requeft; yet the preffing circumftances of the cafe in duced her majefty to grant a certain fum to be deducted out of the fubfidy that was to be paid to the duke of Sa voy. He contended, that from circumftances like thefe, when there was a certainty that the money was employed in a manner to which parliament had confented, when it was to be deducted from a fubfidy that had regularly been granted, a precedent could not be drawn to juftify the measure then in difcution. In 1742, the engagement which minifters had then contracted, took place when parliament was not fitting, though a feffion intervened before it was communicated to the houfe; but a motion was made, that it was dangerous, and the ne ceffity of the circumftance was stated in the refolution which the houfe adopted. He admitted the neceffity of the measure, if it could be made out as the ground of the juftification of minifters. The third precedent adduced in defence was equally inapplicable to the point. The affiftance which minifters gave to Holland in 1787, was given when parliament was not fitting. This affiftance, however, which parliament afterwards approved of, was given from the fecret fervice money, which completely removed every enquiry and every argument which the cafe might have fuggeft

ed,

ed, as, upon Mr. Burke's bill, the oath of a fecretary of state, that the money iffued was for fecret fervices, effectually fecured the minifter from all refponfibility, and precluded all inveftigation. Here Mr. Sheridan repeated what had been obferved before, that the laft parliament was not a meritorious parliament. He asked the minifter what he himself must have thought of that parliament, when out of the alarmifts who had feceded from the ranks of oppofition, he had fent fo many to shelter themselves from danger upon the higher ground, and to hide their heads in coronets from the ftorm which they affected to dread? Surely, if he had entertained a very high opinion of thofe gentlemen, he would not have removed fo many of them from the fcene of action.

For the purpose of giving a con centrated view of the financial proceedings of the whole year, we fhall once more deviate from the order of time, and state the contents of the fecond budget, which was brought forward in the fpring of 1797.

On the 24th of April, when the houfe had refolved itself into a committee of fupply, the chancellor of the exchequer observed, that on that day he had barely to state, that the heads of fupply which were then to be voted were three: firft, an additional fum towards defraying the expences of the navy; next, a fum to make good the charge on the growing produce of the confolidated fund for 1796; and, laftly, to make good the exchequer bills which had been advanced on the vote of credit of 1796. The largest of these fums was for the navy. The money then voted for that fervice already amounted to 7,600,000l.; befides which, the houfe would recollect, he had laid before them an estimate of two millions and a half more which was not then voted; the fum then which he had to call for, was not all to be confidered as a new demand, fince thofe two millions and a half were to make a part of it, and circumstances required a larger fum than had been estimated. The fum therefore which he proposed to be voted was five millions, which, added to the 7,600,cool. already granted, would make the fum of 12,600,000l. This fupply was voted, alfo 1,110,000l. to difcharge the exchequer bills advanced on the vote of credit of the preceding year, and the fum of 2,177,000l. to make good the 3,000,000l. charged in the preceding fellion on the confolidated fund.

Mr. Wilberforce defended the measure of fending money to the emperor as advantageous and juftifiable. Sir William Pulteney, on the contrary, contended, that the conduct of the minifter ought to be marked with the diftinct difapprobation of the house. Mr. Fox clofed this debate with an animated and forcible reply to all the arguments which had been advanced on the minifterial fide of the house. He took the imputation of hoftility to government, and to the parliament that had fupported that government, as a compliment paid to himself. He gloried in having been hoftile to a parliament that ipent above one hundred millions of money in fubjugating America, and in being hoftile to the laft parliament, who fupported the minifters in undertaking a war unneceflary and unprovoked.

The house divided on Mr. Bragge's amendment-Ayes 285

Noes 81.

Mr.

Mr. Pitt, on the 26th of April, brought forward his fecond budget. While he regretted, he said, the calamities and expences with which the prefent juft and unavoidable war had been attended, he thought it his first duty to come forward with a firm and manly fpirit, in which he trusted the house and the country would concur with him, to convince the enemy that however great our preffure might be, we were determined to contend with them as long as we were able, rather than fubmit to haughty and dishonourable terms. He obferved, that the very able and impartial statements of the first report of the select committee of finance had greatly diminished the labour of arranging the plan which he was about to fubmit to the confideration of the house.

He then proceeded to ftate, with his ufual precifion, the amount of the fums already voted, and the fums remaining to be voted. The aggregate of his two budgets made the whole fupplies for the year amount to the enormous fum of 42,786,000l.; an annual expence unprecedented in the annals of finance.

For the navy service of the current year there had already been voted 7,661,00ol. in addition to which the committee of fupply had, a few days before, voted 5,000,000l. more. Although he estimated the expences of the navy department at 7,661,000l. he had at the fame time ftated his intention of propofing a further provifion of 2,500,000l. in order to remedy an inconvenience which had arifen before, that he might thereby have 10,161,000l. in cafh, towards defraying any excefs of navy debt. Such however had been the extraordinary expences of the war, that there then remained an unfunded debt

of the navy unprovided for, to the amount of four millions. The fekect committee had estimated the navy fervices at 12,900,000l. which was fhort of what he had ftated them to be. He had eftimated a floating navy debt of 1,500,000l. the felect committee had fuppofed one of 3,000,000l.

The next head of fervice was the army, for the fervice of which there had been voted the fum of 10,913,000l. but on account of fome army expences being incurred in 1796, which then remained unprovided for, it became neceffary to require the further fum of 3,387,000l. for the outstanding army debt. It is here to be obferved, that the extraordinaries of the army were now, for the first time, brought forward by way of eftimate; at leaft, they were never. done fo fully till the prefent war, but they were paid out of the money granted for other fervices, leaving the provifion for those services deficient for another year. In addition to this, there had been advanced to the emperor, by way of loan (and which would be due from his imperial majefty to the public) 1,200,000l. and the fum of 900,cool. advanced to the merchants of Grenada and St. Vincents, which would alfo be returned.

To the expences of ordnance he made no addition to thofe ftated in the first budget. Under the head of mifcellaneous fervice there had been voted already the fum of 378,000l. and if he proceeded, he faid, by the estimate of the felect committee, the fum of 929,000l would be required instead.

The head of national debt was not augmented by the fecond budget. The fum to fupply the further deficiencies of land and malt was 900,000l. above what was stated in the firft budget.

Under