had not been entered into for the purpose of destroying any set of principles in France, yet it did not follow, that having been forced into the war by the unjust aggreffion of France, we were not to oppofe thofe principles which were fo dangerous to every civilifed go vernment, and particularly as they had led to that unprovoked aggreffion against us. The principles of thofe who were fo forward in calling for peace with France had been gradually increasing from the commencement of the war to the prefent time; they now had reached the point of faying, that the war was perfealy juft on the part of France. Thefe gentlemen had now pretty clearly difcovered their opinions; they faid the ordinary mode for raising the fupplies was gone, but they had not ftated what was the mode. they therafelves would fuggeft. They went, however, to the length of faying, that all extraordinary means of raising them were bad. So that, upon the whole, the mode thefe gentlemen would recommend, as the best and safest to obtain peace, would be to tell the enemy, "you may ask what terms you please, because we are the aggreffors; befides our finances are fo exhaufted, that we have not the means of refifting any terms you may think proper to impofe upon us." He concluded, with hoping the houfe would read the bill a fecond time, and let it go into a committee. Mr. alderman Combe, Mr. Tierney, and Mr. Mainwaring, an nounced that they had all received inftructions from their respective confituents to oppofe the bill. The words ufed in the refolutions entered into by the constituents of Mr. Mainwaring were fo ftrong, that, he faid, he was forry to be obliged to repeat them to the house. The people declared, "that if the measure was enforced, they would either refift or fink under it." The houfe divided-for the fecond reading 175, against it 50. The houfe having refolved itfelf into a committee on the 18th of December, Mr. Pitt rofe and stated the modifications he meant to propofe in this bill. But as an outline of it, as it was finally paffed, has already been given, it would be fuperfluous to detail in this place the debates upon those modifica tions. The third reading was propofed on the 3d of January, 1798, upon which a long debate took place between the minifterial and oppofition fides of the house. Mr. Nicholls faid, that he had not as yet heard an answer to any of the objections which had been made to this tax when firft propofed, and in the fucceeding stages. The first objection made to it, was, that it was unequal, and therefore unjuft. If a tax was to be impofed on income, it ought to be on the idea, that in come was the evidence of property. Let two men draw each 100l. a year, one from the long annuities, the other from the fhort annuities, their income would be the fame; and they would therefore pay the fame tax, viz. 1ol. yet they had manifeftly different portions of pro perty; the annuity of one being worth twelve years' purchase, while the annuity of the other was only worth fix years' purchase. equal burdens on unequal portions of property were unjuft. The next objection which had been taken was, that by compelling the higher orders of the middle clafs to œconomife, it would deftroy the employ of the artifan, and diminish the revenue, by rendering the taxes But on confumption lefs productive. To this fome anfwer had been attempted the chancellor of the exchequer faid, he had relieved the lower orders by diminishing the tax on theirs. As far as the relief granted to the lower orders would occafion lefs money to be raised, he acknowledged the modification to be beneficial; it was pro tanto an abandonment of the bill. But as far as an additional burden was laid on the higher orders of the middle clafs, he thought the modification was not beneficial. For the mischief was, that the direct preffure on the higher orders of the middle clafs would occafion an indirect preffure on the lower orders, for it would deftroy their employment. He denied that the chancellor of the exchequer spared the lower orders. He deftroyed the life of the poor man, if he took away the employment by which he lived. He regarded Mr. Pitt as being more famous for his talents as a debater in that houfe, for the purpofe of amusing the members, than for his talents as a ftatefman; this reminded him of an expreffion of Themistocles the Athenian, who faid, he could not play upon the fiddle, but he could make a little city a great ftate," The chancellor was the reverfe of this, he could play on his fiddle and amufe that houfe, but he had reduced a great empire to a little state. Even his friends acknowledged that he was no great war-minifter; facts had compelled them to make this acknowledgment. Beginning the war with all the powers of Europe on his fide, he had to conducted it, that every ally had either abandoned him, or been fubdued, while France had been exalted to a power almoft beyond the dreams of ambition. Sir Francis Burdet stated in strong terms many objections to the bill; but these objections, and also those of other gentlemen on the fame fide, were fo fimilar to the objections made on the fecond reading, that to repeat them is fuperfluous. He accufed the minifter of having paffed decrees that would not have difgraced the most tyrannical code, deftructive of that freedom of opinion, once the pride and fecurity of Britons; and afferted that thofe laws fo highly prized by our anceftors, for the protection of general freedom, had been by him fufpended or repealed. He had placed, he faid, error in the throne of reafon ; and under pretence of maintaining the conftitution, he had fquandered the wealth, fhed the blood, and annihilated the liberties of the people of England. Thefe were the atchievments of the right honourable gentleman, and this was the minifter and the fyftem the house was then called upon to drain the blood of the country in order to fupport. He called upon thofe country gentlemen who might have been frightened into a fupport of the prefent fyftem, to stand forward at length in fupport of their country. Mr. Jekyll alfo opposed the bill; and on the next day the debate was refumed and carried to a great extent. The principal speakers were, Mr. Sheridan and Mr. Fox, on the oppofition side of the house, and Mr. fecretary Dundas, Mr. Pitt, and Dr. Lawrence, on the minifterial fide. The arguments made ufe of upon this occafion related principally to the old question of the juftice or injuftice of the war, and to an elaborate defence of the conduct of administration on one fide, and an ardent and open reprobation of their measures on the other. Mr. fecretary Dundas, in the the course of his fpeech in vindication of the bill and the meafures of administration, alluded to an interesting letter, which had recently appeared in the public prints, from the earl of Moira to colonel M Mahon, refpecting a plan for forming a new adminiftration. The right honourable fecretary faid on this occafion, that at the very moment when the adherents of Mr. Fox held him out as the only perfon capable of retrieving the affairs of the nation, the great body of members alluded to, who had attempted to effect a change of miniftry, had actually excluded him from any fhare in it. At the close of the debate, the queftion was put, on a motion of Mr. Sheridan's, for poftponing the bill, Ayes Noes 75 1202 Majority 127 On the queftion that the bill be now read a third time, there appeared, Ayes, Noes 196 125 Majority Lord Grenville, in the houfe of lords, on the 5th of January, moved the order of the day for the fecond reading of the affeffed tax bill, and for fummoning the house thereon; which being read, he rose and stated, "that by the addrefs of their lord hips to his majefty, on the 15th of November, they had fignified their determination to defend with their lives and properties the government and conftitution of the country, and the honour and independence of the British empire, and that they were prepared to make the great exertions neceffary for that purpose.". After this addrefs had been read to the houfe, lord Car rington declared that the fituation of the country, required great facrifices to be made for its falvation. but contended, that if inftead of raifing the money in this indirect manner, every individual had been called upon to contribute, in direct proportion, to his income, but the higher claffes in a larger proportion than the lower, it would have been attended with fewer inconveniences than the prefent plan. He conceived, that one twentieth of real income would produce a larger contribution than one-tenth in the manner propofed by the bill. Lord Holland rofe and made his firft fpeech upon this occafion; he faid, the addrefs of both houfes of parliament, cited by the noble fecretary of ftate, as having been voted unanimoufly, appeared to him to be a mere itatement of the exigencies of the times, under the circumstances of the country, but did not warrant any fuch measure as that which was now before them. He contended, that under the prefent adminiftration, for the laft five years, the condition of this country had grown worfe and worfe; that when parliament was called upon to vote for a measure which had for its object the raising fo large a fum of money as was then propofed, it became neceffary to inquire, whether those men to whom millions upon millions of the money of the people had been entrusted, and who had in return for it, heaped upon them diftress upon diftrefs, were about to change their fyftem, as the old one had produced fuch difaftrous confequences? When therefore we heard of our prefent fituation being fuch as required fuch great exertions, he wished the argument to have a retrofpective effect, that the caufes of our prefent calamity might be feen, otherwise D 3 otherwife we should have no chance of avoiding future ruin. But how could it be expected, he asked, that the people would approve of the measure then before their lordships, when it was known that in no one inftance had that miniftry answered the expectation of the public. He thought that this country ought not to grant any more money without à pledge, not only that minifters fhould be changed, but that meafures fhould alfo be changed. He concluded with pointing out feveral objections to the bill, most of which had been noticed in the debates of the commons upon the fame fubject. The duke of Bedford alfo oppofed the bill: he faid, there was a great variation in the description of the measure then before their lordfhips; one noble lord had faid it was a tax upon expenditure; another faid it was a contribution on property. The first question which occurred to him was, whether it was expedient to raise a part of the fupplies within the year? At the commencement of the war, this mode might have been expedient, because it would have inclined the people to reflect whether the objects for which they embarked in the war were worthy of fuch exertions and expenfes. But it was not expedient at a time when the public funds were fo reduced, when by the laws which prohibited individuals to lend to individuals beyond a certain rate of intereft, government had a monopoly of money, and others had no means of procuring it. His grace contended that the measure would occafion a great reduction of expenditure, and confequently a great defalcation of the public revenue. Suppofe a pcrfon then contributed to the affeffed taxes a fixteenth part of his income, the quintuple affeffment would become a tenth part of the whole. It was not only milliners and coachmakers, but, perhaps, one hundred thousand perfons in the metropolis fupported by manufactories that would fuffer. The old taxes were about feventeen millions: if then a tenth part of the income of the country was required by this bill, the reduction of a tenth part of this income would on thofe feventeen millions create a defalcation of 1,740,000l. The bill was defended by the minifterial fide, upon the fame ground of argument as it had been in the commons. The houfe divided-contents 50, proxies 23, total 73-non-contents 6. Mr. Nicholls, in pursuance of notice he had given, moved in the houfe of commons, on the 8th of December, a refolution for applying certain parts of the emoluments of certain offices for the public fervice during the war. This was a measure that was adopted in the reign of William and Mary. He pointed out two kinds of places; one that was dependent on the pleafure of the crown, and the other which was independent of it. As to offices which were dependent on the crown, they might be faid to be fairly enjoyed, becaufe they were fuppofed to be dependent on the talents of the perfons who enjoyed them; but in time of public emergency, he contended, they might as fairly be diminished as the income of any other person was diminished by taxes. As to the oflices in which the grantee had a freehold intereft, it was obfervable, that in the time of William and Mary, there was no difference between them and thofe that were held at the pleasure of the crown; but but he thought there ought to be a diftinction: and in the refolution, which he should fubmit to the committee, that diftinction would be regarded, for it would only refer to thofe offices which were held at the pleasure of the crown. Another difference which he intended to make was in the fum on which the refolution fhould attach: instead of 500l. he fhould propofe 2000l. With thefe variations, his propofed refolution would be the fame, in every other respect, as that which paffed the houfe of commons in the time of William and Mary, nemine contradicente; and the reafon which was then given for it was, that owing to the great expenfes of the war, it was neceffary to the public fervice. If he fucceeded in this ftep he fhould proceed to other regulations refpecting penfions and the civil lift. He concluded with a motion to the following purport: "That it is the opinion of this committee, that the falaries and fees of all offices under the crown fhall be applied to the ufe of the war, except fuch as amount to lefs than zocol. per annum, which fum is to be allowed to all officers whofe falaries and fees at prefent exceed 2,000l. per annum; and alfo except that of the lord chancellor, the speaker of the house of commons, the judges, foreign ministers, and commiffioned officers of the fleets and armies, or any perfons who have a freehold intereft in their refpective office." Upon the refolution of the third of William and Mary being read, the chancellor of the exchequer contended that a more extraordinary mifapplication of a precedent never occurred. If fuch a refolution had actually been agreed to, and ratified by the house in the time of king William, to agree to one on that day fo directly oppofite to it as that propofed would indeed be a very extraordinary way of fhowing refpect for, and adherence to, precedents. Befides, though the refolution was agreed to, it fo happened that what was fo haftily agreed to without a diffentient voice; when it came to be deliberately investi gated, on the bringing up a claufe of a bill to carry it into effect, was rejected without a divifion, as im politic and abfurd. He therefore hoped that the house,out of exceffivê fondnefs for precedent, wouldɛ not adopt a measure which was never adopted before. With respect to the refolutions not extending to falaries under 2000l. a year, he asked, whether it could be faid that there were no qualifying circumftances which kept pace with the various gradations of faiary, and rendered the higher proportionate to thofe below? Was there no difference in the importance of truft, in the labour, in the talents, in the qualifications, in the refponfibility, and in the clafs of life in which they ftood? Would the honourable gentleman fay, in the fulness of his equitable œconomy, that the fame gradations ought not to be observed in taxing office as in taxing property? The honourable gentleman had inveighed, in an elevated tone, against the difproportion of the affeffed taxes to the property of the claffes taxed, and yet held out a plan of indifcriminate taxation, fweeping down all to a level-exacting from an office of 2500l. a year, one fifth; from an office of four thousand, one half; and from one of fix thoufand, two thirds, Mr. fecretary at war obferved, that though the extravagance and abfurdity of the motion had been fuccefsfully expofed by Mr. Pitt, he thought it neceffary to remark, that as the honourable mover had declared that his object was not to raise revenue, but for other purD 4 poles, |