been in the honorable gentleman to introduce it. The honorable gentleman had talked of his argument respecting the permitting the board of customs to appoint their own officers

The Speaker called to order, and told Mr. Sheridan, that he had already been out of order, in questioning the sincerity of the honorable members.

Mr. Sheridan said, with all due submission, when he talked of an honorable member's sincerity, as a public man holding a public argument, and did not advert to any part of his private character, he conceived he was strictly in order.

The Speaker answered, that to question in that manner, went to question the motives on which the gentleman acted; and nothing could be more unparliamentary.

Mr. Sheridan now referred to a former bill, relative to trial by jury in all excise cases; which the honorable gentleman, he observed, must know, as he had a principal hand in it. The bill contained many excellent provisions, which were never executed. After animadverting upon that bill, Mr. Sheridan pointedly ridiculed what Mr. Beaufoy had said relative to the distinction between the land officer, and the officer upon water, remarking that he supposed he was to consider the latter as a kind of amphibious animal-a sort of webfooted exciseman, who was the only corrupt officer; whereas, in his opinion, the officer on land was full as liable to temptation as when he was afloat. Mr. Sheridan next directed his arguments against the Chancellor of the Exchequer; and contended, that by his having admitted that this was the same question as that brought forward before, and declaring he agreed to the principles laid down by his right honorable friend, he, in fact, admitted, the tobacco act was neither explained nor amended by the present bill. He said it was evident that the bill afforded the manufacturers no sort of relief whatever. The bill, he said, permitted the manu

facturers to have a liquid dye necessary to the manufacture, but it forbade them to have the ingredients to make it; which was just like letting a painter make a green colour, but forbidding him the use of red and yellow.

The bill of indulgence, as the right honorable gentleman had termed it, was a mere mockery; and the arguments respecting the house of Sales and Pollard, and the decreases and increases, were un fair and fallacious.

Mr. Beaufoy and Mr. Pitt followed.

Mr. Sheridan rose again to controvert Mr. Pitt's argument, and an altercation of some continuance took place, the gentleman on the other side of the house repeating the charge relative to what had been said about increases, connected with the names of Sales and Pollard in a former debate, and the gentleman on the other side as often denying it.

Mr. Pitt and Mr. Sheridan were both upon their legs several times each.

At length the Speaker put an end to the dispute, by calling Mr. Sheridan to order.

The house divided-ayes (for the commitment) 73; noes 141.

APRIL 30.

EXCISE DUTIES ON TOBACCO.

The order of the day being read, Sir Watkin Lewes moved to bring up a clause, affording an optional right of a trial by jury, or by the commissioners.

Mr. SHERIDAN remarked, that the right honorable and learned gentleman (the Attorney-General) had gone into an elaborate praise of trial by jury, in the very moment he was endeavouring to persuade the house to reject a clause calculated to extend the benefit of that mode of trial to a very numerous description of subjects! This was of a piece with the general conduct of those who supported every extension of the excise laws;-they admitted

them to be an exception to the constitution-they declared them an evil repugnant to principles of personal freedom, and they, nevertheless, voted for them. The right honorable and learned gentleman had stated four cases, in which the defendants had obtained verdicts against the crown; and one of them, he said, was a cause tried againt a person who was a maker of smugglers. That men were made smugglers, and not born such, he was ready to admit ;-but he must contend, that men were made smugglers by act of parliament, and in that manner only. The right honorable and learned gentleman, amidst the extraordinary praises he had been so lavish in bestowing on juries, had said, that in this case of the maker of smugglers, though he and all the court were much surprised at it, the jury had found for the defendant; but that, although he considered the judgment as capricious, he was glad of it, as it proved the independency of the jury. That was rather a singular mode of panegyrizing juries, because he could not conceive that a jury being independent of all regard to evidence, truth, and justice, was a sort of independence very much to their credit. The house, Mr. Sheridan trusted, would do him the justice to recollect, that when he lately had occasion to discuss the question of the excise laws at some length, he had declared that, with respect to applying the trial by jury to the single instance of excise on tobacco, if that idea was thrown out by way of lure or decoy, he should resist it; not thinking the trial by jury a desirable matter, unless a previous revisal of the excise laws was entered upon, with a view to a general reform of that system. This was his opinion upon the subject; but the clause which had been moved, having for its object the applying the trial by jury to the excise on tobacco, he certainly could not hesitate a moment as to his acceptance of the offer.

On the question being put, the house divided—ayes 22; noes 100.

POST-HORSE FARMING BILL.

Mr. Sheridan contended, that the produce of the duty, since it had been farmed out, was not greater than it might reasonably have been expected to have been, had the collection been continued in the hands of the commissioners of stamps. Mr. Sheridan went into a variety of calculations and arithmetical statements, for the purpose of shewing that eleven thousand pounds were the utmost that could be said to be the surplus of the produce of the duty for the year 1789, over the produce for the year 1788.

The bill was committed.

MAY 3.

AFFAIRS OF THE EAST INDIA COMPANY.

Mr. Boughton Rouse (according to order) reported from the committee of the whole house, to whom it was referred, to consider of the several accounts and papers which had been presented to the house in February and March last from the Directors of the East India Company, the resolutions which the committee had directed him to report to the lords; which he read in his place, and afterwards delivered in at the table. On the question, "that the resolutions be read a second time," Mr. Tierney rose, and moved, "that the report be re-committed;" declaring his reasons for doing so were founded upon a partial representation, comprehending only one part of the Company's affairs, and that, if agreed to by the house, they might mis lead the public, and persuade individuals to embark their property on what would appear to be good security with a growing profit; whilst, in reality, it was only a delusive and ruinous speculation.

Mr. SHERIDAN expressed himself astonished at the declaration of the right honorable and learned gentleman (Mr. Dundas), that he did not hold himself accountable to the house for the whole state of the Company's affairs. The right honorable and learned gentleman, he conceived, had not in this declaration done himself justice, because he held in his hand a speech of the right honorable and

learned gentleman, which he could rely on, as it was too correct for a newspaper report, though those reports were frequently very accurate. In fact (Mr. Sheridan said), he considered the speech to have been furnished by the right honorable gentleman himself, and a few printed for the use of his friends. He had, however, the good fortune to procure a copy. He then read a paragraph from the printed speech in question, in which Mr. Dundas stated, "whenever any person came forward, as he then did, to move for leave to bring in a bill enabling the Company to encrease their capital by the loan of a million, he was bound to state their entire situation;" and yet (observed Mr. Sheridan), notwithstanding the excellent doctrine, contained in the paragraph I have read, the right honorable gentleman now says, "I shew you only part of the question, and this shall be the political state of the Company's concerns." Mr. Sheridan insisted, that the house had not a fair account, unless they had an account of the commercial as well as of the territorial affairs of the Company. Mr. Sheridan took notice of a part of Mr. Baring's speech, who had asked somewhat ironically, if Mr. Tierney's representations were just, whether the Company ought to approach Government and beg them either to suffer the Company to give up their charter, or to allow them a premium for carrying on a disadvantageous trade? That irony might sound well, and it might be true that the trade was a disadvantageous one; but, nevertheless, there were reasons which might make it worth the Company's while to carry on a losing trade. The honorable gentleman, he observed, had said, that the four millions which the Company had borrowed, were sunk in the China trade; and, therefore, he considered it as no debt; that being the case, Mr. Sheridan said, he wished to know whether the tea trade had been a profitable or a disadvantageous branch of commerce? and as they were to have a discussion on the subject of the