mutual affection will ensure that spirit of union so necessary to the great end in view;' and their 'confidence, that the final completion of the measure, while it tends to perpetuate harmony and friendship between the two kingdoms, by augmenting their resources, uniting their efforts, and consolidating their strength, will afford his majesty the surest means of establishing a lasting foundation, in the safety, prosperity, and glory of the empire. To this address his majesty returned a suitable answer, and on the 2nd of August Mr. Pitt introduced a bill for the commercial arrangement, without opposition; after which both houses adjourned to the 27th of Oc

tober.

Years of peace, however favorable to arts, sciences, and human happiness, yet, as they afford no field for displaying the talent of the hero, so they yield few materials for employing the pen of the historian; unless when important constitutional questions occur in the senate. The principal transactions of the succeeding seven years, from this period to the commencement of the French Revolution, may, therefore, be comprised in little bounds.-Previous to the commencement of the third session of parliament, the French court had issued an edict prohibiting the sale of various English manufactures in that kingdom; and a similar edict had been published by the emperor, totally prohibiting the importation of any British goods into the Austrian territories. The latter had been excited to this measure by certain articles in a late treaty between the British monarch, as elector of Hanover, and the king of Prussia. To counteract proceedings so prejudicial to the trade of England, commercial treaties were entered into with the courts of Petersburg and Versailles. Oriental politics were also revived by the return of governor Hastings, as well as by petitions from the English inhabitants of India, against several clauses in Mr. Pitt's act: particularly those which established an inquisition into their fortunes, and took from them trial by jury. His majesty opened the session on the 24th of January 1786, with a speech, informing parliament, that the disputes, which threatened the tranquillity of Europe, had been brought to an amicable conclusion; that the growing blessings of peace were experienced in the extension of trade, and improvement of the revenue; and that the resolutions of last session had been communicated to the parliament of Ireland, but that no effectual,steps had yet been taken to make any farther progress in that salutary work.' Among the subjects which early engaged the attention of parliament was a variation from the usual form, introduced into the mutiny bill, to make it include officers upon half pay, and by brevet; which was objected to in the lower house by colonel Fitzpatrick, and general Burgoyne, but passed by seventy-nine to seventeen. In the upper house it was still more violently opposed by lords Stormont, Loughborough, and Sandwich; but the amendment was rejected by fortytwo to eighteen. The next important object was the plan of fortifications, originally suggested by the duke of Richmond, and now introduced into the house of commons by Mr. Pitt, who moved

it as an essential object for the safety of the state. The motion was supported by lord viscount Mahon, lord Hood, Sir C. Middleton, captains Berkeley, Bower, and Luttrell, and Messrs. H. Browne and Dundas. It was opposed by Mr. Bastard, Sir W. Lemon, general Burgoyne, lord North, colonel Barre, and Messrs. Walwyn, Marsham, Wyndham, Courtney, Fox, and Sheridan. The latter entered largely into the question, particularly as it might affect the constitution. When we talk,' said he,' of a constitutional jealousy of the military power of the crown, what is the object of our suspicion? what but that it is in the nature of kings to love power, and of armies to obey kings? This is doubtless plain speaking upon a delicate subject, but the question demands it; and I cannot be suspected of alluding either to the present monarch on the throne, or to the army now under his command. But the possible existence of sinister intentions must enter into the mind of every man who admits an argument on the subject. If this were not the case, we deride the wisdom of our ancestors in the provisions of the bill of rights, and mock the salutary reserve, with which we annually entrust the executive magistrate with the defence of the country.' He concluded by advising all sides of the house to assist in defeating a measure, which, under pretence of securing our coasts, strikes at the root of our great national defence, and at the heart of the constitution itself.' This speech appears to have had great weight with the house; for the votes upon the division were exactly equal, both the ayes and the noes amounting to 169; a circumstance unparalleled in the annals of parliament; and the speaker acquired no small applause from the country gentlemen, for giving his casting vote against the motion. Mr. Pitt, however, on the 17th of May, revived the question, by moving, that an estimate of the expense of such part of the plan of fortifications, as might appear most necessary to be carried into immediate execution, be referred to a committee.' The money necessary for completing this moderate plan he stated at £400,000. But this motion was received with such marked disapprobation by the house that it was withdrawn; and the sum of only £59,770 voted the 7th of June for completing the new works already begun at Portsmouth and Plymouth.

Another measure of considerable consequence repeatedly engaged the attention of parliament, viz. the amendment and reduction of the militia laws. A bill for this purpose, after repeated debates and divisions, passed both houses. On the 9th March Mr. Marsham introduced a bill to exclude persons holding places in the navy and ordnance from voting at elections, which was opposed by Mr. Pitt, lord Mulgrave, and Messrs. Dundas, Grenville, Pye, Drake, Gascoyne, Sir E. Deering, and Sir C. Middleton; and supported by Messrs. Fox, Jervoise, Sawbridge, and Sheridan; but rejected by 117 to forty-one. Though Mr. Pitt opposed this bill, upon the principle that no bad effects were felt from the interference in elections of the persons it was proposed to exclude, yet he supported lord Mahon's bill for regulating elections, which

was drawn up on liberal principles, and was also supported by the earl of Surrey, Sir J. Mawbey, Sir W. Dolben, &c.; but opposed by Messrs. Young, Powys, and Bastard, as well as by Mr. W. Grenville, who styled it a system of Utopianism and impractibility. It was passed, however, by a majority of ninety-eight to twentytwo, and sent up to the house of lords; where it was powerfully recommended by earl Stanhope, and supported by the marquis of Caermarthen and earl of Hopeton: so that it passed the second reading by a majority of eleven to four; but was thrown out at the third, by thirty-eight to fifteen

votes.

Mr. Pitt having on the 7th March moved for a committee on the annual national income and expenditure, their report was laid before the house on the 21st, and copies delivered to the members on the 27th. Two days after Mr. Pitt opened his budget, by congratulating parliament on the pleasing prospect which the report afforded, after the country had emerged from a most unfortunate war, which had added such an accumulation to the national debt, before immense, that surrounding nations expected we should sink under the burden. Instead of this he showed, by various estimates, that our resources were such, that they were not only equal to the extraordinary demands without any additional burden upon the people, but could afford £1,000,000 annually to be allotted to a sinking fund, according to his plan formerly proposed, for reducing the national debt. This sum he proposed to be placed in the hands of commissioners in quarterly payments, to commence on the 5th July 1786. This million, he showed, by compound interest, would, in twenty-eight years, produce an annual income of £4,000,000. Mr. Fox, among other objections to this plan, said, 'that twenty-eight years was too long a period to look forward for its effect, as before that term we might probably have another war;' and afterwards moved,as an amendment, that if £1,000,000 be in the hands of the commissioners, when a new loan is proposed, they shall take £1,000,000 of the loan, and thus receive the bonus for the public. Mr. Pitt congratulated Mr. Fox upon the liberality of this motion, which was unanimously agreed to. A message from the king being now delivered to both houses, stating, "That it had not been found possible to confine the expenses of the civil list within the annual sum of £850,000, Mr. Pitt moved, that a sum be granted to defray all incumbrances, and that £900,000 should remain for the annual expenditure of the civil list;' which, after some debate, wherein the motion was contrasted with Mr. Burke's bill (which had enacted, that no debt should be incurred on the civil list), was agreed to.

On the 5th of May Mr. Pitt moved, 'to transfer a part of the duties on wines from the customs to the excise.' The reason he gave was, that the revenue on foreign wine was inferior by £280,000 to what it was forty years ago. Mr. Dempster recommended the utmost caution in passing bills that affected the liberties of the subject. Mr. Fox oposed the bill on the same ground, as an experiment peculiarly rash. But

though it was also opposed by earl Surrey, and Messrs. Sawbridge, Watson, Courtenay, and Sheridan, it passed by seventy-one to thirty-two; and in the house of lords without a division. In June a message was delivered from the king, recommending an enquiry into the condition of the woods, forests, &c., belonging to the crown, that they might be made as productive as possible.' A bill was accordingly brought in, which contained some clauses that were opposed in both houses, but chiefly in the upper, where they occasioned a division of twenty-eight to eighteen; and where a protest was entered against the act, by the duke of Portland, the earls of Sandwich and Carlisle, Dr. Wilson bishop of Bristol, and lord Loughborough. The commissioners appointed were, Sir C. Middleton, colonel Call, and Mr. A. Holdsworth.

Mr. Wilberforce introduced a bill for amending the criminal laws, which was so much approved in the house of commons that it passed without opposition: but, in the house of lords, it was treated with the severest invective by lord Loughborough, who, during the absence of lord Thurlow, took the lead in all proceedings of that assembly; pleading the cause of experience against innovation, and of liberty against political encroachment. The bill was therefore rejected without a division. East India affairs also occupied a good deal of the attention of parliament during this session; but we have already descanted so largely on these subjects that we shall not here resume them, farther than to mention, that Mr. Francis' bill, 'to extirpate,' as he expressed it, 'the principal evils of Mr. Pitt's bill,' was rejected; that Mr. Dundas's bill for amending the same act (which Mr. Burke styled 'a full grown monster of tyranny' in comparison of which Mr. Pitt's bill was only an abortion'), by increasing the power of the governor general, was passed; that an amendment moved upon it by Mr. Sheridan, to divide it into two bills, the one respecting the political, and the other the judicial government, was adopted; and that, after repeated motions for papers on India affairs, the refusal of some, and production of others, the exhibition of charges against Mr. Hastings, and the examination of various witnesses on the business, grounds of impeachment were found against him, by a majority of 119 to seventy-nine. About the close of the session a singular occurrence was mentioned in the house of lords. A bill had been introduced relative to the prize money obtained by the capture of St. Eustatius: lord Rodney said, he had lodged the papers of the merchants of that island in the secretary of state's office, as documents of treason against them; but, on calling for them in justification of his conduct, he was astonished to find that they had been carried off, and were no where to be found. Mr. Knox was called in proof of this fact. In consequence of this, the bill was rejected without a division; and two causes for £13,000 then depending before the court of appeals, at the instance of Messrs. Lindo and Ingram, against lord Rodney and the captors of St. Eustatius, were decided against the captors with full costs, on the 5th July. On the 11th the session was ended. On the 2d August his

majesty's life was attempted by a mad woman, named Margaret Nicolson, who, under pretence of presenting a petition, made two thrusts at his breast with a knife, both of which fortunately failed. His majesty with great temper exclaimed, I am not hurt Take care of the poor womanDo not hurt her.'

On the 26th September 1786 the treaty of commerce and navigation, between France and Great Britain, was signed at Versailles. This treaty was extremely popular. It was not only very advantageous to England, but seemed to be the fruits of a triumph of liberal sentiments and enlarged views, over ancient prejudices and mercantile jealousy. Its general principle was, to permit the mutual exchange of every species of commodity, except warlike stores. It was recommended to the sanction of parliament in his majesty's speech, at their meeting on the 24th January 1787. But in the debate on the address, and on the 12th February (the day appointed for taking the treaty into consideration), it was censured by opposition, both as to its commercial and political tendency. Mr. Fox argued at great length that France was the inveterate and unalterable enemy of Britain; that the incessant object of her ambition was universal monarchy, and from us alone she feared to be traversed in her pursuit. Mr. Pitt said, 'his mind revolted from the supposition, that any nation could be unalterably the enemy of another. It had no foundation in history or experience. It was a libel on political society, and supposed the existence of a diabolical malice in our original frame. In a commercial view, this treaty would enrich this nation. It would be advantageous to France, but more so to us, &c. The premier's resolutions, approving of the different articles in the treaty, were all successively carried by large majorities in both houses. He soon after moved to lower the duties on Portuguese, Spanish, and Madeira wines, one-third below those on French wines, which was agreed to.

On the 26th February he moved several resolutions on the consolidation of the customs, which were so obviously advantageous, that they were agreed to with very little debate. Mr. Burke, instead of opposing the measure, returned thanks to Mr. Pitt as the author of it.

On the 7th May Mr. Dundas opened what he called the budget of India; upon which he moved several resolutions on the state of our revenues there, which, after some opposition, were passed without a division. On the 26th April Mr. Pitt introduced a bill for farming the tax on post horses, as a remedy for the frauds committed in that branch of revenue. This mode of collection was reprobated as unconstitutional, by opposition; but, after a warm debate, was carried by 162 to ninety-five. Previous to this decision Mr. Fox moved a repeal of the shop tax: which, after some debate, was rejected by 182 to 147. A bill for amending the laws respecting lotteries was introduced by ministry, and passed the house of commons; but, having been amended by the lords, was thrown out by the commons; and a new bill introduced, which passed both houses. Lord Rawdon called the attention of he house of lords to the convention with Spain,

and moved a resolution disapproving of it. He said, that we certainly might have made a better bargain, than to yield a tract of land as large as Portugal, which produced cotton, indigo, logwood, and sugar, for a tract of twelve miles, and the liberty to cut logwood in Honduras Bay. It was an act of ingratitude, too, he said, to deliver up the inhabitants of Musquito shore to their old implacable enemy. Lord Caermarthen and the duke of Richmond opposed the resolution, which was defended by lord Stormont, but rejected by fifty-three to seventeen.

Two constitutional questions, respecting the Scottish peerages, were brought before the lords during this session. The first was on a motion by lord viscount Stormont, that the earl of Abercorn and duke of Queensberry, who had been chosen of the number of the sixteen peers, having been created peers of Great Britain, thereby ceased to sit as representatives of the peerage of Scotland.' This motion was supported by the bishop of Landaff, the earls of Hopeton and Fauconberg; and opposed by lord Morton, but passed by fifty-two to thirty-eight. The second question arose from the election of the earl of Selkirk and lord Kinnaird, in the room of Queensberry and Abercorn; wherein the dukes of Queensberry and Gordon had voted contrary to the resolution of 1709. Lord Hopeton therefore moved, on the 18th May, 'That a copy of that resolution should be transmitted to the lord register of Scotland, as a rule for his future proceeding in elections: which was opposed by the duke of Richmond, lords Thurlow, Morton, and Sydney; but supported by lords Kinnaird, Stormont, and Caermarthen; and carried by fifty-one to thirty-five.

The question respecting the hardships protestant dissenters labored under by the test act, was introduced by Mr. Beaufort on the 28th March, and urged with great strength of reasoning. One invincible argument he drew from the hardship it imposed on conscientious ministers of the church of England itself. By the positive precepts of their religion, they were enjoined to warn from the sacred table all blasphemers, and persons of a profligate life yet to these very persons, if they demanded it as a qualification, they were compelled by the test act to administer the sacrament. If there were any thing serious in religion, if the doctrines of the church of England were not a mere mockery of the human understanding, if to talk of peace of mind here, and of eternal consequences hereafter, were not the idle babblings of superstition, no pretext of state policy could justify this enormous profanation, this monstrous attempt, as irrational as impious, to strengthen the church of England by debasing the church of Christ.' The motion was supported by Mr. Fox, lord Beauchamp, Sir James Johnston, Sir Harry Houghton, and Mr. Smith, but opposed by lord North, Mr. Pitt, and Sir W. Dolben; and rejected by 178 to 100.

The English law has long been disgraced by its severity to debtors. Imprisonment for an unlimited period had been the practice since the reign of Charles II. On the 22d May a bill to relieve unfortunate persons of this description was read the second time in the house of lords,

the consort of his serene highness the stadtholder, sister to the king of Prussia, with the greatest indignity. His majesty had thought it necessary to explain his intention of counteracting all for cible interference on the part of France in the internal affairs of Holland, and gave orders for an augmentation of the forces both by sea and land. It had also been thought proper to conclude a subsidiary treaty with the landgrave of Hesse Cassel. Meanwhile, the rapid success of the Prussian troops under the conduct of the duke of Brunswick at once obtained the reparation demanded, and an explanation took place between the courts of London and Versailles, by which it was mutually agreed to disarm, and to place their naval establishments on the same footing as in the beginning of this year. During the alarm respecting the affairs of Holland, Mr. Pitt had proposed to the East India directors to send out four regiments of the king's troops at the expense of the company, which they had agreed to; but, on the alarm subsiding, they refused, after the troops were ready to embark. Mr. Pitt, therefore, on the 25th of February, moved a declaratory bill, to remove doubts respecting the power of the commissioners on India affairs.' On the second reading, Mr. Erskine reprobated its tendency, and drew a striking contrast between the India bills of Mr. Fox and Mr. Pitt. The latter,' he said, had stolen every thing that the former demanded; and, while it presented the company with the trappings of sovereignty, reduced them to the condition of slaves.' The bill, however, after repeated violent debates, passed both houses. A protest was entered against it by fifteen peers, among whom was lord Hay, earl of Kinnoul.-While the prosecution of Mr. Hastings was going on before the house of lords, an impeachment was moved in the house of commons by Sir Gilbert Elliot, against Sir Elijah Impey. Of the six charges exhibited against him, the only one discussed before the house was, that for the murder of the rajah Nundcomar, a chief of the Bramins. On the 28th of April Sir Gilbert entered fully on the charge; and showed, that forgery, the pretended crime for which Nundcomar was executed, was not capital in India; that the English law had never been promulgated among the Hindoos; that it did not even extend across the Tweed; and therefore, it was as absurd and unjust to apply it to a Hindoo, as it would be to try the Great Mogul for bigamy. Mr. Fox said, "It was not for forgery that Nundcomar was hanged. It was because he made an accusation against Mr. Hastings;'-'If,' said he, 'I were upon oath as a juryman, I would pronounce Sir Elijah guilty of a deliberate murder.' Messrs. Pitt, M'Donald, Arden, and Sir R. Sutton, defended Impey; and Messrs. Burke, Francis, and Sir J. Johnstone supported the impeachment, which, however, was negatived by seventy-three to fiftyfive. The second charge, being now before the privy council, was deemed improper to be entered on; a circumstance, which Mr. Burke considered as a collusion between Sir Elijah and the company. The prosecution was therefore postponed for three months, and from the enquiry no impeachment resulted. A great number

of petitions having been presented against the slave trade, in the beginning of the session, Mr. Wilberforce gave notice of his intention to bring in a bill on the subject; but being prevented by indisposition, Mr. Pitt, on the 9th of May, moved a resolution, That they would early in the next session take into consideration the state of the slave trade.' Mr. Fox said, that the slave trade ought not to be regulated, but destroyed, as notoriously hostile to justice and humanity.' Mr. Pitt's motion was then agreed to, nem. con. The session was closed on the 11th of July.

Towards the end of the year a circumstance occurred which alarmed the whole nation. His majesty's health had been precarious for some months, and in November he was afflicted with a severe indisposition, which prevented him from meeting parliament. Symptoms of alienation of mind had appeared; and, after the examination of the royal physicians, an, important question was started in the house of commons concerning the right of supplying the want of royal authority during the incapacity of his majesty. After very considerable debates, resolutions were carried in the commons for appointing the prince of Wales regent, with power to execute and administer the royal authority. He was, however, prevented from conferring peerages but or persons of the royal issue, and those of full age; and from granting offices or pensions, or salaries for life, or in reversion. The real, or personal property of his majesty was secured, and was not to be considered as appertaining to, or under the control of, the prince regent. The care and custody of the king's person was committed to the queen, who had power to remove and appoint, from time to time, all persons belonging to the different departments of his majesty's household, during the continuance of his indisposition, and no longer; and, for the better enabling her to perform this duty, a council was appointed to advise with her majesty on all matters relative to this trust, who were also empowered to examine upon oath, at such times as they should think fit, the physicians who had attended, respecting the state of his majesty's health. These resolutions being agreed to, after much debate, a committee was appointed to communicate them to her majesty, and his royal highness the prince of Wales. The prince replied to the committee in terms that did honor to his humanity, liberality, and patriotism; and the queen expressed her satisfaction and pleasure at the measures they had adopted in the present situation of affairs. The bill passed the house of commons on the 12th of February, and was presented to the house of lords on the following day. Here it was discussed on the 17th and 18th, and a few amendments were introduced into it; but before the lords could communicate their concurrence to the commons, a protest by upwards of fifty peers was entered on their journals. Happily, however, these proceedings terminated at this juncture. On the 12th of February the king had been declared by his physicians to be in a state of progressive amendment; and on the 17th convalescent; an adjournment of the house of lords was therefore