The King's Message respecting the Disembarkation of Hessian Troops.] Mr. Secretary Dundas presented the following Message from his Majesty.

"GEORGE R.

"His Majesty thinks it proper to acquaint the House of Commons, that a corps of Hessian troops, taken into the pay of Great Britain, to be employed on foreign service, having been brought to the appointed place of rendezvous off the Isle of Wight, his majesty has found it necessary, with a view to the preventing. any sickness taking place among the said troops from their continuance on board of the transports, to order them to be disembarked, and to be stationed, for the present, on the Isle of Wight, at Portsmouth, and at places adjacent. G. R.”

would have covered, by its magnitude, | I conceive, to be revised. For, in a free the walls of the court." And 8, Because country, there ought not to be one mode in one year of the trial of Warren Hast- of administering justice to one man, ings, esq., namely in the year 1790, there namely, to Mr. Hastings, and an opposite were no less than four decisions of the mode of administering justice to another House of Lords upon this subject, viz. on man, namely, to Mr. Muir. the 25th of February, when the lords reSTANHOPE. solved, "That the managers for the Commons be not admitted to give evidence of the unfitness of Kelleram for the appointment of being a renter of certain lands in the province of Bahar; the fact of such unfitness of the said Kelleram not being charged in the impeachment." And again on the 4th of May, when the lords decided, "That it is not competent to the managers for the Commons to put the following question to the witness upon the seventh article of charge, viz. Whether more oppressions did actually exist under the new institution than under the old?" And again on the 18th of May, when the House of Lords resolved, "That it is not competent to the managers for the Commons to give evidence of the enormities actually committed by Deby Sing; the same not being charged in the impeachment." And again on the 2nd day of June, when the Lords resolved, "That it is not competent for the managers, on the part of the Commons, to give any evidence upon the seventh article of the impeachment, to prove that the letter of the 5th of May 1781, is false, in any other particular than that wherein it is expressly charged to be false." The said decisions of the House of Lords are founded upon principles not peculiar to trials by impeachment. They are founded upon common sense, and on the immutable principles of justice. In Scotland those principles are peculiarly necessary to be adhered to, inasmuch as by the laws of that part of the kingdom, a defendant is obliged to produce a complete list of all his witnesses in exculpation, the day before the trial. That alone appears to me a considerable hardship. But if, after such list is actually delivered in by the defendant, any facts (or supposed - facts) not particularly set forth as crimes in the indictment, may, on the following day, for the first time, and without notice, be suddenly brought out in evidence upon the trial against the defendant; such defendant, from such an entrapping mode of trial, may be convicted, although innocent. Such proceedings (whether supported or unsupported by any old Scotch statute passed in arbitrary times) ought,

Debate in the Commons on the Treaty with the King of Sardinia.] Mr. Pitt having moved, "That the copy of the Treaty with the King of Sardinia be referred to the committee of supply,"

He

Mr. Fox said, he considered this treaty to be one which his duty to his constituents did not permit him to assent to without some observations, and a satisfactory answer to those observations. had never conceived that it could be wise to enter into any treaty by which we were to receive nothing and to give every thing, or to bind ourselves to maintain a perpetual war for the benefit of the party with whom we contracted, without something stipulated in our favour that might be held an equivalent for so hazardous an engagement. When he looked at the treaty, he should have supposed that the king of Sardinia had it in his power to put into our possession the port of Nice, or to afford us an easy passage into France through his territory of Savoy. These, indeed, would have been advantages for which we ought to have given something in return; because, under certain circumstances, they might have contributed much to the facility of carrying on a war with France. But, when he recollected the circumstances under which the treaty was made, he found that the king of Sardinia had lost

both Nice and Savoy before we thought and how much more honour to ourselves' of entering into any negociation on the should we have said, "The king of Sardisubject. He admitted that the assistance nia is not to be oppressed because he is of the king of Sardinia might be useful weak. In all transactions between nations, in the prosecution of the war; but in ob- justice is to be regarded as well as power. taining assistance we ought to estimate The restoration of Savoy is demanded by the benefits on either part, as well what justice, and essential to the future tranwe gave as what was to be given us. By quillity of Europe. We shall listen to no this treaty the king of Sardinia was bound propositions for peace of which this is not only to maintain 50,000 men for the de- a preliminary." With how much more adfence of his own territories. If we had vantage and honour might we thus have expected any thing more of him we had stipulated for the restoration of Savoy, if been miserably disappointed; for that part this miserable treaty had never been made. of France which was justly supposed to We should then have stood forward as the have been the most averse from the pre- protectors of the weak, and the defenders sent reigning system in Paris, and there of the balance of power. Now, we had fore the most likely to enter into our views, not given, but sold our assistance to the far from receiving any support from the king of Sardinia-and sold it, for what? king of Sardinia, had been left to pay the For nothing. Ministers having done this, forfeit of what the Convention called and the House having sanctioned it, they treason to the republic. What, then, did were next to call upon the people of Engwe gain by this treaty, in stipulation or land to pay a subsidy of 200,000l. He in fact? That the king of Sardinia should knew, that in every war to be carried on keep up a force to defend his own territo- by a confederacy, we must pay the weaker ries. What did we engage to perform? powers whom we engaged in that confeNot only to pay a subsidy of 200,000l. a deracy; but we were not certainly to pay year, in aid of maintaining this force, but them all; nor those whom we did, for deto restore to the king of Sardinia all those fending themselves. Did we suppose, on territories which the French had wrested the present occasion, that the king of from him, while we were sitting quietly by Sardinia had no inclination to defend his and boasting of our neutrality. Unless own dominions? If we did, our money we could afford to make war for ever; un- should have been asked for as a grant, not less we supposed ourselves exempted from as a stipulation which was to involve us in the ordinary vicissitudes of human affairs, difficulties of a thousand times more conwe might be reduced to purchase peace sequence than the value of our money. We by great sacrifices on our own part, in could not, however, suppose that the king order to make good our engagements of Sardinia was not inclined to defend himwith the king of Sardinia, or to subject self, without our paying for it. Our treaty, ourselves to the reproach of breach therefore, was not a purchase, for we did of faith, by making peace without ob- not buy the king of Sardinia's inclination : taining the restoration of his territories. nor was it a gift, for we, the givers came One would have thought, that for all this under an obligation to the party to whom the king of Sardinia was to do some- we gave. It might be said, that the treaty thing of equal importance for us; but in bound the king of Sardinia to continue the the treaty we looked for an equivalent in war as long as we might think fit, even vain. We were not only to pay him for after he himself might wish to conclude it. keeping up a force to defend the territo- If this was what we had gained by the ries he had still remaining, but bound our treaty, would not the neutrality of the selves to make peace without restoring to king of Sardinia have been more beneficial him the territories he had lost. For the and far less embarrassing? It would not sake of argument, he would admit that the be argued, that there was any chance of a restoration of Savoy to the king of Sardi- separate peace between the king of Sardinia was necessary to the balance of Eu- nia and France; or that the king of Sardirope, and that no peace ought to be made nia had any prospect of recovering Nice with France but upon that condition. and Savoy, without our assistance. What, Why, even in this case, fetter ourselves then, had we done? If the recovering of with an engagement which we could not his territories was of more importance to possibly know that we should be able to the king of Sadinia than it could be to us, fulfil? When the time of treating for peace we had given a subsidy, where we ought came, with how much more advantage, to have received onc. He should perhaps

-

be told, that the treaty being concluded | nations only by their vices. Compare our by his majesty, the proper representative present dangers with our former, and see of the country in all transactions with fo- how much greater ought to be our exerreign powers, the House could not refuse tions. So striking was the difference, that to ratify it, without subjecting themselves in the present war of necessity, he would to the imputation of a breach of faith. say, Let every man who can furnish moThis doctrine he must peremptorily deny. ney, furnish money; let every man who If the House was considered as bound to can furnish a shirt, furnish a shirt. He make good every treaty which his ma- conceived it to be an essential part of the jesty, by the advice of his ministers policy of all nations, that in a war of demight think proper to conclude, there was fence, assistance was to be obtained a complete surrender of the public purse wherever and however it could be had; and to the executive power. Mr. Fox con- that those of whom we received assistance cluded with observing, that having thus were to be assisted in return. Might we not, briefly stated his objections to the treaty then, in any instance, commute succours with the king of Sardinia, the other trea- in money for succours in men? The subties, particularly that with his Sicilian ma- sidy granted to the king of Sardinia was jesty, were not to be considered as having not for his own defence only, but for the his approbation, because he did not state general purposes of the war. He held as his objections to them at the same time. high as any man the right of parliament to refuse supplies; but to refuse the sanction of the House to this treaty would be to loosen the bands of the combination now so fortunately formed to resist the madness and anarchy of France. To dissolve this combination might suit the views of those who thought that we had no interest in what was passing on the continent, and that the narrow channel by which we were divided from it was a sufficient protection.

Mr. Powys said, he had been surprised, on a former occasion, to hear the treaty with Sardinia called unprecedented and iniquitous. The epithet " unprecedented," applied by the right hon gentleman, so fond of harsh epithets, was now abandoned. It was natural for the right hon. gentleman, and those who, like him, opposed the principle of the war, to oppose every measure that could contribute to its success. On the contrary he, who thought that our commerce, our constitution, our liberty, and religion, depended on the vigorous prosecution of the war, could not oppose any treaty that seemed likely to render it successful. To prove that the treaty was not unprecedented, he appealed to former treaties with the king of Sardinia and with Portugal. He requested gentlemen to recall to memory the construction of the treaty with Portugal upon the Spanish succession, the treaty with Savoy on the grand alliance, and the treaty of Worms in 1743. These treaties had been ratified by the members of the cabinet at that time, and sanctioned by the House without any debate. When, by the treaty of 1704, we obtained the accession of the king of Sardinia to the grand alliance, the war then depending was of the same nature with that in which we were at present engaged. We were fighting for our independence as a nation, and the tranquillity and liberties of Europe. Compare the dangers with which we were threatened by the ambition of Louis 14th with those which we had to dread from the present rulers of France; men whom he could not dignify with the name of barbarians, who were allied to civilized [VOL. XXX.]

Mr. Ryder said, that accustomed as he was to a profusion of epithets from the right hon. gentleman he did not expect to hear the epithet "unprecedented " applied to the treaty with the king of Sardinia. If the right hon. gentleman had taken the trouble of consulting former treaties, he would have found in them every article which he stated as objectionable in this. Treaties supported by the first statesman this country ever saw, or Europe ever gloried in, were not to be stigmatized as unprecedented or iniquitous. In every war with France, the alliance of the king of Sardinia had been considered as of the utmost importance. When a nation like France was aggrandizing her power, and threatening the subversion of every state, there certainly was a necessity for raising the utmost strength to oppose her progress. The treaty was called injurious. In what respect could it deserve this epithet? Did not the Sardinians co-operate with us at Toulon and in the Mediterranean? Was the capture of Toulon nothing? Was the burning of the French navy nothing? Did they not still continue to assist us? It was by the combination of many weak powers that stronger ones had [4 P]

ever been subdued. He had heard it stated, | war?" the epithet, "unprecedented" his that Sardinia, so small and so defence- right hon. friend had never used, or had less, could not avail us in any instance. used it only to say that he hardly knew How! Were not the Milanese and Mont- any thing that could be called unpreceserrat protected by her? Were none of dented. But if his right hon. friend had her commodities to be estimated? Her used that epithet, he must hear many corn, her wine, her olives, her fisheries more circumstances than had yet been and cattle, all, by her alliance, were ob- stated before he could think that it did tained for the supply of our fleets in the not apply, as well as the epithets “absurd Mediterranean, and was it not of conse- and iniquitous." To prove any resemquence to prevent the French from ob- blance in point of precedent between this taining the rich supplies which they might and former treaties, it must be proved have drawn from this quarter? The treaty that they were concluded under circumhad been called the purchase of an incli- stances nearly similar. All the argunation to defend her own territories. True ments of gentlemen on the other side had it was so. But although Sardinia had the proceeded on the presumption that they inclination to defend her territories, she were so. At the time of concluding one assuredly had not the power, and there- of the treaties referred to, instead of findfore our assistance became necessary. ing the king of Sardinia actually engaged Sardinia, in 1703, stipulated to raise in war with France, and part of his territo45,000 men for the sum of 200,000l. where- ries taken from him, we found him the ally as she now raised 50,000 for the same of France, and gave him the terms stipulated sum. At that time the other allied powers in that treaty as the price of breaking his allihad likewise paid subsidies, all of which ance with France and taking part with us. were purposely and solely made for the In default of other arguments, the favourite defence of the Sardinian territories, and topic was resorted to, which, as had been surely if at any period the defence of justly said, made men's passions instruct these territories was necessary, it was their reason; and the House was told that more particularly so at present. With the anarchy of France was more dangerous respect to the stipulation, that peace than the ambition of Louis 14th. What was should not be concluded, without the res- the nature of our contest with that motoration of all the territories of the con- narch? A contest for our constitution, tracting parties, it was the practice in and our liberty; for the independence of every such treaty. If we were not bound every state in Europe. What more could by treaty, we should be bound by policy, our contest be now? At the time of conto prevent France from multiplying her cluding the treaty of Worms, the king of ports in the Mediterranean by keeping Sardinia was engaged in war, and had possession of Ville Franche and Nice. If lost part of his dominions. To that treaty, we should bring France to negociate for however, the queen of Hungary our ally peace with a government, considering, was a party. Did it appear that our preitself under obligations to the combined sent allies were parties to the present powers; or if we should compel the pre- treaty? If the precedent were as apt as sent anarchy of France to sue for peace, gentlemen could desire, did it follow that would not Nice and Savoy in either case a bad treaty concluded then would justify be restored? If unfortunately we should the conclusion of a bad treaty now? He be obliged to treat on other terms, then admitted that Savoy ought to be recoall security for the balance of power, all vered for the king of Sardinia. But this security for our own tranquillity must va- ought to be made a general object of the nish; and under such circumstances the confederacy against France, as was done king of Sardinia would not desire the con- by the treaty of Worms. The other comtinuance of the war. Whether, therefore, bined powers might have concurred with we were successful or unsuccessful, our us in this object; but this did not appear stipulations to the king of Sardinia could by any information of which the House not militate against our interests. was in possession, and until he was assured of it, he must consider the present treaty as iniquitous and absurd. Was it necessary to give all that was given by the treaty to the king of Sardinia, to induce him to join the grand alliance? If it was necessary, he should still complain

Mr. Grey said, that in no question of giving energy to the operations of war had his right hon. friend, or those who acted with him, given any opposition. The question now to be debated was, "Is this a treaty calculated to give energy to the

that in giving it we bound ourselves down to terms injurious to our own interests. Those ministers who saw Savoy taken from the king of Sardinia; who after it was taken, boasted of their neutrality, and never said a word about recovering it, till they had prevailed on the king of Sar-ed to deliver that which he had formed, dinia to accept of a subsidy, coupled with he should stand excused from the charge a stipulation that it should be recovered, of presumption. now came to demand the assent of the House to their treaty. He did not grudge the 200,000l. a year; it mattered not much whether the sum was too great or too small but he would not agree to take a shilling out of the pockets of his constituents, to make good a treaty concluded without a due regard for the benefits they were to receive in return to what they were to pay.