agreed to, our naval force would consist of 60,000 men; and if it should hereafter appear that a larger number was necessary, there would be no difficulty in increasing it. Mr. Elliot said, he was always willing to give every support in his power towards the defence of the country, whenever its necessities appeared to demand it; but he must complain of the sort of systematic darkness in which ministers wished to keep that House. In former times, the custom constantly prevailed, whenever such a vote was submitted, to afford the most satisfactory information as to the nature of the case; that they might judge whether it was such as required the vote proposed. Ever since the treaty of Amiens had been concluded, that House had not been put in possession of any information as to the exterior relations of the country. It was extremely improper to go on, session after session, without such information as we had formerly been accustomed to receive when votes of men and money were demanded. However, considering himself pledged only to a measure of precaution, he should give his vote for the motion. well apply to the present measure. Could a war between Russia and Turkey, immediately affect our security? or rather, was not that armament intended to maintain the political balance of power?-If that armament had no other object in view than the maintenance of the balance of power, and was embarked in for political reasons only, then perhaps I might say, let us have no war with Russia for such reasons. There have, however, been times and circumstances, when a mere armament in the ports of a rival power, in the port of Brest for example, though there appeared no adequate reason to suppose it to be intended for hostile purposes, yet I conceive it should induce government to arm; and how could such an armament be prepared without a message from his majesty, such as has been brought down upon the present occasion? If then, in such a case, an armament is judged advisable, how much more expedient, or rather necessary, must it be to adopt a similar precaution, when not only a large armament is fitting out in the ports of a rival nation, but even while to that circumstance is added a pending negotiation of considerable importance? For even, although that armament should Mr. Canning said:-Sir, I have no really be intended for its avowed purposes, thoughts of pursuing the discussion of the yet if the negotiation ended in a rupture, constitutional doctrine, respecting informwould the House hesitate to vote the num- ation and confidence which has been ber of seamen now proposed, even as a carried to such a length between the hon. measure of mere precaution? In that gentleman opposite to me (Mr. Fox) and light alone it should now be viewed; nor my noble friend. I have sufficiently dewould the vote of this night pledge par-clared my opinion upon this subject, by liament to any thing farther. The subject the question which I took the liberty would still be open to inquiry and discus- of putting to ministers on a former night, sion when farther communications should | be received respecting the progress or issue of the negotiation. Now, Sir, let me assure gentlemen, that ministers do not pretend to call for any greater degree of confidence than what the spirit of the constitution usually grants to persons in their situation: a degree of confidence which is generally afforded to government, to whatever hands it may be entrusted; and no greater degree of confidence has any minister a right to demand than what is founded on the opinion parliament entertains of their principles and conduct. As to the proposed amendment, I do not well see how the House can adopt it. It was usual for the House to agree to the number of men proposed to be voted; but there were few instances in which a greater number was proposed. If the present question was and to which I received an answer not very mildly worded, norsuch, perhaps, as, under all circumstances, a minister was very well warranted in giving. No matter. That answer, such as it was, completely satisfied my purpose in asking the question. My purpose was, to ascertain, whether, in the event of the present armament not leading to war, any ground for it would be laid before parliament, any account of the reasons which had led to it, or of the purposes which it had answered. Nor was this an inquiry of idle curiosity. The answer to it was, in fact, to influence not indeed my vote, but the manner in which I should give it, the reasons and qualifications with which I should accompany it. If I had been told, that in case of either result, whether of war or of accommodation, ministers would at the proper time, lay before parliament, all the information requisite for enabling them to form a judgment upon the propriety and policy of the present extraordinary preparation and alarm, I should have felt completely satisfied in concurring silently in the vote of this night, as well as that upon the address, knowing that the question of "whether rightly called for, or not, by the executive government," would come in a natural course to be matter of discussion. I would not in that case have encumbered my vote with any statement of my view of its extent or meaning. But ministers having called for a vote of this sort without any statement of the grounds of it, or the promise of any such statement except in one alternative, that of war, I have an additional duty to perform; I must, from the best observation that I can make, form my own opinion of the necessity of the measure which is proposed, and of the results to which it ought to lead; and as ministers will not tell me the grounds on which they ask my vote, I feel it the more incumbent on me to make myself understood as to the grounds on which I give it to them.-The advantage of the course which ministers have preferred is not so obvious to my mind, as it seems to be to that of some other gentle men. It secures unanimity to be sure; for that which pledges no man to any thing, may very naturally obtain a pretty general concurrence. But I doubt whether the same latitude of interpretation, which embraces all opinions in one vote, does not weaken in a proportionable degree its force as well as its precision. The hon. gentleman opposite to me, for instance, considers his vote of this night as pledging him absolutely to nothing-nothing but that 10,000 seamen shall be raised; but as to what is to follow the raising them; nay, if the mere fact of raising them, if this armament itself (no impossible supposition) should be the cause of hostile discussion with France, and ultimately of war, he does not consider himself as pledged in the smallest degree; he does not engage to countenance ministers in that discussion, or to support them in the prosecution of that war.-My noble friend has told us, and truly, that in all times the single fact of the fitting out of armaments in the ports of a neighbouring and rival power, would have been held to justify a similar armament here. Undoubtedly it would; undoubtedly too the fact of the armament abroad must be taken in this, as in former instances, on the king's word, on the faith of the message which ministers have advised his majesty to send down. But here the question with me is, not, would this be a sufficient reason? but, is thisthe reason? If the message had said no more; if my noble friend would tell us plainly (which, however, consistently with the message it is impossible for him to do), "this is all-the French are arming, therefore it behoves us to arm too," I should not have a moment's hesitation in voting any number of seamen that ministers might propose, or in concurring in any other vote for ena bling them to meet, and defeat, the possible designs of the enemy.-I should give my vote without a word of explanation; and should perfectly understand the vote that I was giving. But that this is not a true statement, that it is. not the whole truth of the present case, is manifest, as well from the message itself, as from a comparison of the conduct of ministers on this occasion, with what it has been at former, not very distant periods, when armaments to a much greater extent were carrying on in the ports of France. I allude to the first expedition to the West Indies last year, between the signing of the preliminaries and the definitive treaty; when so far from expressing any jea lousy, so far from putting parliament and the country upon their guard, so far from sending down a message to call for increased preparation, and to excite the idea of an approaching renewal of the war ministers professed themselves perfectly at ease; and those persons in this House who ventured to intimate a suspicion, that such an armament, at so delicate a moment when the peace was yet raw and unsettled, might possibly be intended for other objects than those which were given out, such persons, I say, were vehemently reprehended and rebuked by ministers and their admirers in this House, as entertaining unwarrantable jealousies, as creating ill blood between new friends, as aspersing the character of the first consul of France and ascribing to him a disposition to falsehood and treachery which could not be imputed without the grossest injustice.— Now what is the state of the case? Those same ministers put into the mouth of the king a message complaining of armaments in France, in nearly the same terms as those which last year so much excited their indignation and reprehension; and insinuating that these armaments, though "avowedly" intended for colonial pur poses (meaning, I suppose, for the purpose of taking possession of their own colonies, for otherwise the information, however authentic, would not be very comfortable, nor the "avowal" on the part of the enemy a very modest one,) are in fact destined against the shores of this empire. I cannot, therefore, be satisfied with the general argument, that, in all cases, preparation against preparation, outfit against outfit, armament against armament, has been the uniform policy of this country, and a sufficient foundation for the proceedings of parliament. It has not been so in the instance of the present ministers; and the contrast between their former and present conduct, between what they did and said on the expedition to Saint Domingo, and what they are saying and doing now, between their rebukes at that time of those who presumed to doubt the good faith of Buonaparté, and their plain declaration, in the royal message, of their own heavy suspicions of him at the present moment, is a sufficient proof that some great and ominous change has taken place in the relation between this country and France, and that when ministers call upon me for my vote for 10,000 additional seamen, or whatever other sort or description of force they may please to call for, I am not to conceive myself to be voting that force on the old constitutional ground of necessary precaution only; but that there are in truth other objects in contemplation, that there are in truth nearer and more precise questions at issue. The message itself states plainly the existence of these other objects: and at length, in his second speech this night, my noble friend has admitted that the "important discussions still pending between this country and France" have their share in originating the proposition for an increased military force, and are in fact in the contemplation of the vote for which we are now called upon. This, Sir, is the very admission which I wanted, but which it was so difficult to obtain. What! says my noble friend, if the mere circumstance of an armament in a neighbouring country would justify the government in requiring an augmentation of force, does not the additional circumstance of important discussions being actually pending between that country and this, give additional weight to the requisition? Undoubtedly, Sir, most undoubtedly. But does it not also entitle the House of Commons to more precise information? I do not mean at the instant that is matter of discretion-but to a promise at least of information hereafter; when the discussions shall have been terminated, and when the objects of them can therefore be disclosed without danger. Do not let me be mistaken, as if I were pressing for full information now, beforehand, as if I de. sired to be let into the secret of negotiations at this moment carrying on, and the success of which may possibly depend upon their being managed with prudence and secrecy? No such thing. All that common place is thrown away in answer to my proposition: which is this only, that some time or other, at a proper season, and when the disclosure can be made without hazarding any interest, the House of Commons will have a right to expect that the use which has been made of their grants, the purpose to which they have been applied, and the effect with which they have been employed, should be fairly stated to them. That is the only rational confidence in which they can vote. With that confidence they may reasonably vote even in the dark; trusting that their darkness is not to continue for ever. Here then, Sir, in the union of these two grounds stated in the king's message, in the statement that armaments are going on in the ports of the enemy, and that there are at this moment important discussions pending between us and France, do I find the justification of this night's vote; and upon these grounds, taken together, do I cheerfully concur in it.-I vote for 10,000 seamen, or any other number that ministers please to ask, not only to enable government to be prepared against any sudden invasion, or any hostile aggression which may be committed by the armaments in France and Holland in any part of the world, against the rights and interests of this country; but farther to enable them to bring at length to a point all the discussions which are at this moment pending between them and the first consul of France. I inquire not, I have no wish to know, on what subjects those discussions turn. It is notorious enough that there are but too many possible grounds for them; that some of the articles of the treaty of Amiens are yet unexecuted, some of them perhaps unexecutable; and that there have been on the part of France acts of insult, violence, and outrage, innumerable, unexampled, intolerable, for which ministers are per fectly justified in demanding reparation and atonement. I ask not for any information at this moment. I express only my confident hope that ministers have asked for this armament, and that they will employ it effectually, to bring to a final settlement all these vexatious and perplexing differences which have already, God knows, been suffered to subsist too long; that they are determined to be trifled with, mocked, and wronged no longer; that they think the country has already suffered enough by delay and irritation; that they will not lay by the means of exertion which they have now acquired, nor let them languish in their hands, until they shall have converted the present ambiguous and feverish repose, which is at once the disgrace and danger of the country, into solid and real peace. This I expect of them. I trust that they, in common with the public, are weary and ashamed of the state in which we have been kept; a state anomalous and undefinable; a state, for which the annals of history afford no precedent, and the vocabulary of politics furnishes no name; a state, not of profound peace, as it was most whimsically and unaccountably described by a right hon. gentleman below me (the chancellor of the exchequer) a few nights ago! but a state neither of peace nor of war; neither of secure rest, nor of honourable or hopeful exertions; peace, if peace it must be called, without tranquillity, without economy, without safety; and subject to all the anxieties, more than all the dangers, and no small part of the expenses of war, without the chance of its advantages, without the consolation of its glories, and without that prospect which war, vigorously conducted, always affords, of leading to a termination in secure, settled, and permanent peace. This state, I say, I hope ministers are determined by every exertion to change into a definite and durable state of things; by war, if war for that purpose shall be unavoidable; but by firmness, by spirit, by a resolution to be trampled upon no longer, I believe it may be effected; and I believe, if these means had been sooner resorted to, the effect might have been produced long ago. In this confidence, and in the confidence that, when they surrender up an account of the trust which we are now committing to them, they will show us what they have done with it, and satisfy us that they have employed it to the best advantage, I heartily concur in the present vote; but I warn them, that if they should relax their efforts before they have accomplished all that is required of them, if they should come down to parliament with a history that the armament in the hostile ports had, after all, sailed to its avowed destination, and that therefore there is an end of jealousy and preparation on our part; if they shall attempt to put this fraud and trick upon the country; if they shall no otherwise atone and account for the shock to public confidence and public quiet, which their late message has produced,-unnecessarily if no other result than that which I am here cautioning them against should be apparent; if, in a word, instead of a complete, honourable, and durable settlement and consolidation of the peace, they shall do no more than restore the country, after this shock, to the same feverish, unwholesome repose from which they roused it; to that slumber which is disturbed by constant alarms, and perpetually recurring horrors and dangers, by which the country is not refreshed and recruited, but exhausted, harassed, and agitated, even more than by war in its worst form; if this should be the end of all our preparations, the produce and reward of all our confidence, I shall then accuse ministers of having disappointed the vote of this night, and abused the trust reposed in them, of having deceived parliament, and betrayed and undone the nation. This, Sir, is the meaning of my vote. And with this explanation I heartily concur in the proposition upon your table.-One word only upon a subject which has been introduced into the debate of this night, the persons and characters of those who fill responsible situations in his majesty's service, and their capacity to conduct the affairs of the country in a crisis of such difficulty and danger. Sir, at a moment like the present, I, for one, cannot pause to inquire who are the ministers of the crown. The crown calls upon us for instant help to avert instant danger. This is not a time to consider into what hands the management of what we grant is to be committed. We have no leisure to choose. Awful indeed is the responsibility of those who advise the call that is thus made upon us; and the time of this account must come. But for the present let us give without hesitation all that can be required by the executive government, be it in whose hands it may ; trusting that the means which are thus The House having resolved itself into a committee, cheerfully furnished to them will be employed in a manner suitable to the importance of the interests at stake, and such as shall deserve the unqualified support which is afforded by parliament, and the zealous and enthusiastic unanimity which pervades all ranks of the people. Sir W. Pulteney observed, that the people might be reluctant to enter into a war, of which they could not perceive the precise object. But if once they were shown and enabled to see that a war was unavoidable, they would cordially determine upon a vigorous prosecution of it. Now was the time to show all Europe that this country was prepared for any alternative. He hoped, indeed, it was so prepared as to be enabled to meet any hostile attempt. That the country was not able to enter into such a contest, he could not agree. It was as able as ever; and since, to every considerate observer, it must appear that a struggle must come between England and France, it was better it should come now than hereafter. The resolution was agreed to nem. con. Debate in the Commons on the King's Message respecting the Situation of the Prince of Wales.] Feb. 23. The Chancellor of the Exchequer having moved, that the House should resolve itself into a committee of the whole House, on the King's Message respecting the Prince of Wales, Colonel Stanley asked, whether it was intended to raise money for the purpose of relieving the embarrassments of the prince; or whether this measure was not a compromise for certain claims of money, which had not been appropriated to his use? If it was a compromise on account of claims on the revenues of the duchy of Cornwall he must say that the House could not know whether he had any legal claim or not, as lawyers were very much divided in opinion upon that subject. In any other light, his duty to his constituents, would not allow him to lay any additional burdens upon them on this ac count. Mr. Chancellor Addington denied, that the present motion was founded at all upon a compromise of claims; neither was it for the purpose of paying the prince's debts, as they had been already provided for by a former arrangement; it was merely with the view of re-establishing his Royal Highness in that splendor which belonged to his rank in the state. Mr. Chancellor Addington said, he rose to submit a proposition, which he flattered himself would meet with the general acquiescence of the committee; for it was impossible for him to entertain a doubt that every member felt that he had a constitutional share of interest in the splendor and dignity of the heir apparent. He was perfectly convinced, that those who proposed the measure in 1795, and those who supported it, felt it a painful but indispensable part of their duty to adopt the measure, which was afterwards agreed to, and made a legislative provision. It would be recollected, that in April 1795, a message came from his majesty recommending an extension of the establishment of the prince of Wales; expressing a regret that the income of his Royal Highness had not been adequate to the support of his station; and stating distinctly, that his majesty had no idea of proposing to parliament to make a provision for the discharge of the debts of his Royal Highness, otherwise than by appropriating a part of his income for that purpose. Upon this message the House had acted; the measure was proposed by his right hon. friend the late minister, who brough forward the proposition, founded on a just comparison of the means to support th establishment of the prince of Wales, with the amount of his incumbrances; and a comparison was also made between the state and condition of things in the year 1795, and those of former periods. His right hon. friend had stated, that in 1742, a provision was made by parliament to the then prince of Wales, of 100,000l. per annum, exclusive of the revenues of the duchy of Cornwall; and all that his right hon. friend asked of the committee at that time was, to consider the change which had taken place in the value of money from the year 1742 to the year 1795, and desiring them also to consider the necessary increase of the establishment of the prince of Wales in conse quence of such changes. There had been also an increase of 25,000l. per annum granted on that establishment, an addition which very few persons thought exorbitant, and to which, therefore, little objection was made. His right hon. friend then argued, that the income of his Royal Highness, in 1795, would not, in reality, become greater by what he proposed, than that which had been enjoyed by his royal |