navy, which was considered as ample, it now appeared that he had formed erroneous calculations to the amount of three millions."

After enumerating a variety of particulars, he asserted, what was indeed completely verified by the event," that with the administration then in power this country could not have peace. The right honourable gentleman, Mr. Pitt, (he added) wanted the requisites to bring it about, for he wanted the confidence and the respect not only of the enemy, but of Europe. It was impossible that France could have any confidence in the pacific disposition of the present cabinet, composed as it was of men avowedly united by no other bond than that of hatred to the French republic, and at direct variance on every other political principle; a cabinet which, if peace was unexpectedly to arise from their negociations, could only regard each other with hatred and contempt for having deserted the only professions by which they were, or even pretended to be united. As to respect, they could not lay claim to it in any court on the continent. What neutral power was there we had not attempted to bully? Yet what neutral power was there, however insignificant, which had not set our threats at defiance, and laughed at the impotence of our menaces? Of the states with which we had allied ourselves, which of them was there which had not betrayed or plundered us, or both together? In what congress could an English ambassador sit, deputed by the present administration, that must not present to him the plenipotentiarics of powers which had in

sulted,

sulted, deceived, over-reached, or deserted his employers?"

In reply to Mr. Pitt, who appeared to be much hurt at this phillipic, Mr. Tierney observed, "that the right honourable gentleman had got by heart a set of fine flourishing speeches, on purpose to chastise any body who should presume to doubt the excellence of his plan, and that this strange rant was meant for some other person, for in my life (added he) I never uttered a sentence in this house for or against the system or principles of the French;" and he concluded by observing, "that if the minister wished to make another attack upon any one whom he was disposed to crush, he should remember that a man might be in that house in the same situation as if he were to live in a mill-he would be a good deal frightened at first, but would soon become accustomed to the noise."

In March 1798 Mr. Tierney gave his most cordial support to the bill brought in by Mr. Dundas, "to enable his Majesty more effectually to provide for the defence and security of the realm ;" and in reply to a coarse and unwarrantable sneer on the part of a member in the neighbourhood of the treasury-bench, he added, "that no part or action of his life could justify that honourable gentleman in insinuating, that he was not animated by as cordial a zeal for the welfare and prosperity of his country, as any man who lived in it."

On the debate on the introduction of a bill "for preventing the printing and publishing of newspapers by persons unknown, &c." the new act was warmly

opposed

opposed by Mr. Tierney; but he was at the same time candid enough to bear testimony against an attack which had been made on the humanity of those whom he had opposed with such indefatigable zeal. "If cruelty of any kind (said he) has been employed against the French prisoners, I can safely say that the executive government of this country ought to be exonerated from such an imputation; nay more, I am persuaded that no cause for making so gross a charge against the humanity of Englishmen does exist."

In the spring of 1798 we find him voting for the suspension of the habeas corpus act, in consequence "of the preamble of the bill being founded on the verdict of a grand jury;" he soon after supported Colonel, now General Walpole, in his enquiry into the conduct of the assembly of Jamaica, relative to the transportation of the Maroons; and in the summer of the same year, in consequence of the melancholy aspect of affairs in Ireland, he declared, "that the minister ought to come down to the house clothed in sackcloth and ashes, to find public affairs in such a critical state in the fifth year of the war, and after an expenditure of about two hundred millions of money."

On the meeting of parliament, however, he most cheerfully acquiesced in the motion for the thanks of the house to rear-admiral Lord Nelson, and affirmed "that no man was more anxious than himself for the general security of the empire, and that no man ever felt more warmth and animation than he did whenever our navy was triumphant."

On

On Monday, December 11, he himself made the following motion:

"That it is the duty of his Majesty's ministers to advise his Majesty against entering into any engagements which may prevent or impede a negociation for peace, whenever a disposition shall be shewn on the part of the French republic to treat on terms consistent with the security and interests of the British empire."

Upon this occasion he intimated a suspicion that the pacific disposition manifested in his Majesty's declaration, soon after the conference at Lisle, had been abandoned, in consequence of our late successes. It was his opinion, however, that any haughtiness of this kind was ill-timed, as the combination against France had been dissolved, and that country was more powerful than ever. "The great confederacy against that country (added he) was when the unfortunate monarch was under trial, and at the time of his deaththat was the period when the combined powers were in the greatest force, and Europe on the tiptoe of expectation. It was then that France experienced all the disadvantages resulting from an unsettled government, and that all her power and all her strength were employed, merely for the purpose of resisting actual invasion; that her troops were raw and undisciplined, and she had nothing to depend upon, or to oppose to all her difficulties, but the energy of the people. Let gentlemen consider what are now the boundaries of that republic, and then let them look at what is to be effected by a general confederacy. What produced the discomfiture of the last? the skill of the French, or the jealousy or indecision of the allies?

Take

Take which you will of these two, and the conclusion will be the same.

"Shall I be told that the policy of the French is less now than it was then? that their strength is less? that their generals are less able? their army less steady, or less powerful?-I think not, Sir! Now take the other side of the alternative: Is there a greater probability that the allies will adhere to each other at this moment, than they did formerly? Have they a greater ardour for the common cause now than they had then? Look at the relative situation of the different powers. Is it to be believed that Austria will place more confidence in Prussia, supposing a new confederacy formed, than she did formerly? Can we have more confidence in either of them, after we have been deserted by both? Will any gentleman say that we ought to vote larger supplies than any that have yet been voted for the purpose of adjusting this or that territory, which may belong to the right or the left bank of the Rhine? Can any man think that these are points essential to the interests of Great Britain? Can any of the powers expect much from the co-operation of Russia? Can the Emperor expect any cordial support from those who have deserted him already? Can we look for any degree of hope from the decisive and prompt action of the Ottoman Porte? Will any man lay his hand upon his heart and say, that any of the combinations.

I have stated can be of real service to Great Britain?" After remarking that we were carrying on a war, the expence of which might be estimated at thirty millions a year, or two millions and a half every

month;