so mis-stated and unfounded, that he could not sit quietly in his place and let it proceed without explanation. Mr. Steele then stated a narrative of what had fallen from the chancellor of the exchequer in 1786, when the system of appropriating a million had been first adopted. The most essential part of this statement was, Mr. Steele's reminding the house, that the chancellor of the exchequer had in 1786 expressly said, that although he expected to find several extraordinary uids to enable him to go on with, yet that such extraordinary demands might occur, that he might have occasion for a loan of one or two millions; that he would put it off as long as he possibly could. That Mr. Steele said was the fact, and therefore there was no ground for charging his honourable friend with any thing like a fallacy. Mr. Steele referred Mr. Sheridan and the house to the report of the navy board, on which the revenue committee of 1786 had built that part of their report, and thence they would see that the navy expenses had not increased beyond what might have been expected.

Mr. Sheridan declared that he never heard any assertion with more astonishment than that of the honourable gentleman who spoke last. He gave him as much credit as his recollection of a speech, delivered four years ago, could entitle him to; but, without putting his memory against the honourable gentleman's, it was utterly impossible that the chancellor of the exchequer could have come to the house with a speech to contradict the report of his committee. He averred that in that report there was not an idea thrown out about the probability of a future loan. Was it to be concluded that the right honourable gentleman (Mr. Pitt) could so far forget his object, as to say to the house, that perhaps he might want a small sum of a million or two, for the pose of paying off three millions of the national debt? The right honourable gentleman himself admitted the increase of the army to be a permanent expense. He believed the navy establishment could not be diminished with a due regard to the safety of the country; but on that subject it was not his intention to argue at present, if the right honourable gentleman did not oppose his motion for appointing a committee of the house, of a different complexion from the former. They could have the best information from Sir Charles Middleton. He added, that he would either on the morrow, or on Monday, move for some papers which were necessary to be submitted to that committee.

pur

The Marquis of Graham imputed much of the misconception which appeared to have prevailed, to gentlemen confounding the statements of the two last years' expenditure and income with that which the committee of finance, in 1786, had reported would be the state of the income and expenditure at the end of the year 1790. The marquis stated what the committee of 1786 had considered as likely to be the peace establishment at the end of the year 1790, and what had been the

conduct of his right honourable friend at the time when the report was made. He animadverted on the novel idea of a committee constituted like that which an honourable gentleman (Mr. Sheridan) had described, of such as had neither been in office, nor had any expectation of being in office, nor desired to be in office. The members who were on that committee ought (the marquis conceived) to be sworn previously to their sitting as committee-men, as to the extraordinary fact of their never desiring to be in office.

Mr. Sheridan observed, that he could not avoid admitting the pleasantry with which the noble marquis treated his proposition for an independent committee. Notwithstanding the noble marquis had humorously said, that the members nominated on such a committee should swear, that they did not wish to be in office; yet, he had no doubt there were gentlemen in that house who neither were in office, nor wished to be in office; and who were competent to the business in question. Did the noble marquis mean to intimate that there were no gentlemen in the house, excepting placemen, who were capable of examining and stating the resources and expenditure of the national finances? He did not say the same committee had wilfully deceived the public; but their conclusions certainly were not justified by experience; and therefore he thought himself at liberty, without meaning to throw the smallest imputation on any member of that committee, to move for a new inquiry into the state of the public accounts.

The Marquis of Graham defended his animadversions on the committee, by urging the extreme novelty of the formation of such a committee, and he considered the proposition of such a committee as an indirect imputation on gentlemen in office;-the obvious inference being, that they would abuse the trust which might be reposed in them by the house, and report what they did not believe to be the fact. Such an imputation the marquis considered as derogatory to the dignity of the house; and he declared that he felt it to be injurious to himself.

Mr. Sheridan protested that he meant nothing coarse or personal, and denied that it was a novel thing to have such a committee. As a proof of this, he mentioned a committee which had been appointed during the American war, and consisted chiefly of country gentlemen. He did not like to have such another committee as that of 1786, because, though he did not mean to charge them with having done so intentionally, he was of opinion they had deceived the house and the public. With regard to a committee of gentlemen in office, Mr. Sheridan thought they were liable to be less careful in their inquiry after the truth, from

a natural wish to find the most favourable side of the question to be the fact, than any other set of gentlemen.

The question was at length put, and the resolutions read a second time, and agreed to. Mr. Pitt gave notice of his intention to move the house on the 15th to go into a committee to consider the duties payable on tobacco.

Mr. Sheridan wished to know whether it was Mr. Pitt's intention on that day to move any final resolution on the subject. He really thought that in a question of so much importance, at least as much previous notice should have been given to the merchants and manufacturers of tobacco, as had been given to the dealers in wine, when it was put under the regulation of the excise laws.

Mr. Pitt answered, that it was his intention on the 15th, to state the grounds on which the proposition he had to bring forward was founded; and afterwards to move the committee to agree to it.

JUNE 19.

REVOLUTION COMMEMORATION BILL.

MR. SHERIDAN observed, that an honourable baronet (Sir William Dolben) disapproved of mixing politics with religion; and another honourable member's objection was, that there was already a commemoration of the revolution, in what he called the liturgy. This appeared rather a curious objection. With respect to keeping politics out of the church, he owned, that in one view it should be so; but, would it be an unfit thing for the church to acknowledge that obligation, which no man disputed to be very great and serious? He thought that if there was any one point which did the greatest honour to the church, it was the church's having been the chief cause of producing that very revolution on which the bill went to establish the commemoration. The only objection which he had heard against the bill, that was of any weight, was that of taking a day of the week for the commemoration, and making a new holiday; but as the honourable gentleman who brought in the bill had expressed himself willing to waive that point, and to take either the Sunday before the 5th of November, or the Sunday nearest to the 16th of December, no ground for opposition remained.

JUNE 24.

TOBACCO REGULATION BILL.

The order of the day for the second reading of this bill having been read, it was afterwards moved "that the bill be committed."

MR. SHERIDAN observed, that he should not so far trespass upon the patience of the house as needlessly to prolong the debate, if that could be called a debate, where objections only were offered from one side, and not one word of answer was given on the other. He rose merely to make a single remark, which was, that if the bill was committed for the next day, whatever time might have been given to the tobacco traders and manufacturers to comprehend the clauses of the bill, parliamentarily speaking, no time had been allowed to the members of that house to understand it. The bill had been brought in only two days ago, and printed for delivery that day; it consisted of one hundred and twenty-five pages, and no gentleman could, at a glance, comprehend the various bearings of a bill so important in its nature, and so complicated and extensive in its detail. Before it came into a committee, the members of that house had a right to consider it in all its parts, to consult the manufacturers in person, and to acquire a competent knowledge of the entire subject. The right honourable gentleman had boasted of his having seen and conversed with the tobacco manufacturers of Scotland, London, and other places. If he thought such communications absolutely necessary before he held himself justified in stating the principle and object of the bill to the house, why should not the members of that house be allowed time for equal preparation, and for the acquisition of the same extent of intelligence? Mr. Sheridan, therefore, hoped that the right honourable gentleman would not so hastily forward the bill, that, but having had it read a second time that day, he would not press for the committee upon the ensuing day; but would give time for the petitioners to prepare their counsel, and to bring up their witnesses, who were now upon the road.

Mr. Pitt said, that Alderman Watson and Mr. Sheridan had stated that the frauds committed on the revenue in the article of tobacco, amounted to no less a sum than from £300,000 to £500,000, and the object of the bill was, to endeavour to recover the greater part of that sum by means of the excise laws, and by accommodating them to that article, which was universally admitted to be a fit article of taxation. To such a principle the friends of the public credit and of the

public safety, could not surely be inclined to object. The worthy magistrate over the way, and the honourable gentleman who spoke last, had said, they thought that he wished to shrink from discussion, and to avoid it by precipitating the bill through the committee. From such an imputation he should appeal to the sober sense of the house, and ask them, when it was considered that counsel were to be heard, and witnesses examined, and that consequently there was not a probability of their doing more than hear them in part the next day, whether his being anxious to commence an inquiry into the subject in the most circumstantial and regular manner looked like a wish to avoid its fair discussion? With regard to the honourable gentleman's intimation, that it was necessary for him to run about the town to converse with the manufacturers of tobacco, if he really was in earnest, and seriously wished to learn information from them, the best mode of his obtaining it would be for him to attend his duty in that house the next day, and listen attentively to the arguments and the evidence.

Mr. Sheridan observed (in answer to Mr. Pitt), that he had said it was necessary to go into the committee for the purpose of inquiry, whereas he must know that if the members of that house were not allowed time to read and understand the bill before they went into a committee, the inquiry would answer no purpose whatever. Whether they were to run about the town after the tobacco manufacturers, as the right honourable gentleman had chosen to call it, was another matter. But since he had risen last, the worthy magistrate behind him had added another and a very strong objection; and this was no less than a defiance to any member of that house, a particular description of it only excepted, to stand up and declare that he had read the bill. Surely this was an unanswerable argument against precipitation.

Mr. Pitt answered, that with regard to the honourable gentleman's argument of members not being prepared, the best way would be to attend the committee. With respect to the witnesses of the manufacturers being upon the road, the manufacturers of London had originated the opposition to the bill, and would, most probably, produce the evidence they wished to have examined; and of their intention to oppose the bill, they had, by public advertisement in almost every newspaper, given notice for full three weeks. He hoped that gentlemen would attend the committee, whatever inconvenience to themselves it might occasion; and indeed, when the advanced period of the session was considered, he should think it trifling with the convenience of the house by delaying the going into the committee with the bill a moment longer than was necessary.

Mr. Sheridan replied, that with regard to the convenience of the house, he thought the right honourable gentleman would consult it more by giving time for members to understand the bill. Mr. Sheridan was proceeding to answer Mr. Pitt, when he