Mr. Pownall (Secretary to the Board of Trade) detailed the different proofs the Georgians had given of a rebellious disposition. He observed, that in honour to his Majesty, two days before his last birthday, they threw the cannon of one of the forts in the province, into the river: forcibly entered the powder magazine, and plundered it of every ounce of its contents. Their own newspapers were full of accounts of these exploits. If any other proof was requisite, the last resolution of their committee must be sufficient to convince the most unbelieving, for they had voted 10,000l. towards what they called the common cause, which, in his opinion, shewed plainly that they were in earnest.

Mr. Burke said, this was the first time he ever heard newspaper information made a foundation for any solemn proceedings in that House, except an odd time, when the gentlemen of the quill made free with the noble lord who sat on the Treasury bench, and a few of his chosen friends in both Houses. He said, he sometimes frequented a coffee-house near the House, and he had a right to say, that the master of it was extremely negligent of his duty, for he had never laid any of those hostile papers the hon. gentleman mentioned before him; yet on recollection, he could not help thinking that this House, and not coffee-houses, would be the fittest place to look for information; but he was sorry to say, that this House was one of the last in the island he would look to for any kind of information. On the whole, he was sorry to perceive so sudden an alteration in the hon. gentleman, for he remembered when the hon. gentleman in office was not a member, no man was clearer, none readier to communicate, in the most candid manner, every intelligence that was proper, or consistent with his situation. For that reason, said he, I fear there is something infectious in the air of this House. This gentleman, who not long since was intelligence itself, seems to have been at once emptied, and instead of drawing from his usual source, is suddenly obliged to draw his most important information from the newspapers. The motion was negatived.

On the order of the day for the third reading of the Bill,

Mr. Bayley said: I am well convinced there never entered this door, a Bill fraught with such injustice and cruelty as the present. In order to wreak the revenge of a vindictive ministry on the Americans,

you are now going to ruin all the plantations in the West India islands, and to give their present produce up for plunder to your sailors, before the inhabitants can have any notice of your intentions. And by this infamous trick you think you shall be able to man your fleet without giving any bounties to your seamen, which I much doubt if you will find answer after all; yet the attempt is so very base and wicked, that I defy any one to mention such an instance even amongst the most savage nations, where a minister ever dared to give up such a number of innocent persons to plunder, without the least crime being laid to their charge. Sir, I have several times told the House, that before the Congress had shut up the American ports, which was the 10th of Sept. last, a great number of their vessels sailed for the West Indies, chiefly in ballast, where the planters are now loading them under the sanction of our Acts of Navigation, never suspecting that we are this day capable of making a law which is to entrap them, by enacting, that unless American vessels came to them loaded with lumber or provisions, and obtained a certificate of it to bring with them to Great Britain or Ireland, with a particular description of their cargoes then on board, that the planter's property was to be seized and made lawful prize of, although they could not possibly know of any such stipulations; therefore, Sir, I frequently urged how unjust it would be, not to give the inhabitants of those islands timely notice of your design before you subjected their goods to forfeiture. I now again, Sir, have a clause in my hand to offer for this purpose, and if it be not accepted, all mankind will agree in seeing the intention of this Bill in the same light that I do. But, Sir, the noble lord at the head of the Treasury insinuates, that no injury is meant by this Bill to any of the proprie tors of West India estates: if that was really the case, his lordship could have no objection to such a clause; but what serves to convince me more than any bare professions is, that no one will accept the 1,000 guineas I have declared myself ready to give, to whoever will indemnify my property that is now at sea from being seized, until I can send information to my managers in Jamaica to forbear shipping any more on American vessels. Sir, I think it an infamous robbery to have my property taken from me without having infringed any law whatever, and without

giving

me time to guard against such laws as you are making. Although the loss I may sustain on this occasion may not much affect me, I know many of the inhabitants of the West India islands will be ruined by it, having the greatest part of what they are worth in the world on board American ships now on their passage to this kingdom, and which is now out of their power to remedy. And notwithstanding they are insured against the risk of the seas, and even pirates, yet I am sorry to say that after escaping all these, their ruin is inevitable, from rapacious and unprincipled ministers.

The question being put, that the Bill do pass; the House divided.

Debate in the Lords on the American Prohibitory Bill.] Dec. 15. The American Prohibitory Bill was read a second time; after which,

The Duke of Manchester said: I rise, my lords, to give a negative to this Bill, because, with all the attention I have been able to bestow in considering and examining its contents, I cannot discover on what ground of policy, justice, or expediency, it can be fairly supported. I must observe, that the manner of hurrying, and the season of the year at which this Bill has been introduced into parliament, in remarkable thin Houses, at a time when no business of importance ought to be brought under your lordships' consideration, unless in cases of the most urgent necessity, is to me one very great objection to sending it to a committee. If we examine this Bill, my lords, we shall find the great principle of it to be founded in the most aggravated injustice. We shall find it involving the innocent and guilty in one common punishment, and, above all, we must lament to see public and parliamentary encouragement given to the subjects of one part of this great empire to destroy and pillage the other. Looking again to the sanction of the Bill, and to what is virtually to force it into operation, we find one of the fundamentals of this constitution invaded. The unhappy people are not only destined to destruction, they are likewise to be plundered;

and to insure the execution of the measure, the plunder is to be shared among those who are to be employed to effect this barbarous business. The matter I allude to, my lords, is that clause which authorizes the seizure of every species of American property, found floating on the sea, or in their ports and harbours; and shares the spoils thus taken, among the captors. This, I will maintain, is a direct violation of that yet sacred palladium of our liberties, the Bill of Rights; a palladium which it is not in your lordships' power to alter, violate, or abridge, without a direct invasion of the constitution. That invaluable law, my lords, enacts, that the property of no subject of this realm shall be seized or confiscated, without previous trial or conviction. Is that the case here? Will any of your lordships say, that the clause of this Bill, which gives the seizure to the captors, is not the most violent outrage on property that can possibly be conceived? In the first instance, the ships, goods, &c. are seized and turned over to the Admiralty court, where they are condemned of course. Thus at one instant the mischief is done, and the means of obtaining justice completely defeated. Part of my leisure hours, my lords, I dedicate to reading; and since this Bill made its appearance in the other House, I have looked into books the most likely to in- » struct me on this head, to see if history could furnish me with a precedent of a si milar nature; I found but one, that bore the least resemblance; and that was the conduct of the second emperor of China, of the Tartar race, who issued an edict, directing that all the inhabitants on the sea coasts should burn and destroy their towns and their shipping. The edict was punctually and rigorously executed, and several thousand people lost their lives in the cruel devastation. This matter now alluded to, applies equally to the justice and policy of the Bill. My lords, I think it is impossible to hear or read of the present struggle of America, in resisting the oppressions she daily suffers, and the accumulated horrors with which she is threatened, and not be highly interested in the event. I feel similar impressions, but in a stronger degree, to those made on me in reading of the actions of Alexander, as described by Quintus Curtius, or the issue of the battle of Pharsalia, where Cæsar gave the world a master. It is impossible, while the scene is yet passing, not to be deeply affected in the event of the present mea

sures. My lords, I should be obliged to any of the noble lords in administration, to rise and inform me what is the true ground on which they mean to rest the motives of this ruinous and unnatural war. Is it for a revenue? No; that has been disclaimed by them in this House, on the first day of the present session; and it has been since frequently and openly avowed, that no revenue is expected. "It is," said they, "no object; and if it were, for the present, such a scheme would be inexpedient. We want America only to acknowledge a constitutional dependency on this country, an acknowledgment of the power of this legislature; and we then wish to give them perfect security and full enjoyment of their subordinate constitutional rights." Does such a language comport with the principles of this Bill? Are any offers held out to induce the Americans to return to their duty, and acknowledge their subordinate dependency? Is the claim of taxation given up, or even suspended, in order to remove the apprehensions such a claim has justly excited in that country? No, my lords, the whole question lies at issue, as when the differences first arose, and war as against alien enemies, is by this Bill, denounced and publicly declared, without a single syllable of conciliation or concession; and that with an express intention of supporting, in the most unqualified manner, every one claim hitherto set up by this country over that. When a rebellion raged in the northern part of this island, a rebellion fomented and carried on against the establishment in church and state, no such prohibition as the present was thought on. Many of the people in that part of the kingdom, remained firm and loyal. In such a case, an act of this nature would be impolitic and unjust. We have been told frequently, that great numbers of people in America continue friends to government. Why then punish them? Why adopt such a plan of indiscriminate injustice? Why involve the innocent and guilty in one general judgment? This Bill may establish in future a claim, at least an expectation, which I dare say, your lordships do not foresee. Suppose, my lords, another rebellion should break out in the northern or southern part of this island; would not the soldiery in such a case have as good a right to expect the plunder and confiscations consequent on the reduction of the rebels, as the seamen are given by this Bill? I see no reason t

that they should not. It would operate as an encouragement, and every motive would apply in one case, that can possibly operate in the other. Every argument that can be urged in behalf of the innocent and unoffending part of the inhabitants of America, still more strongly, if possible, operates in behalf of the West India islands, which by this Bill are to be included in the general proscription, without even so much as the slightest imputa. tion of guilt. The West Indians too, are to be starved and ruined, to effect the desirable purposes of administration. Desti tute of provisions and lumber, they cannot exist; or supposing they could procure the former, what are they to do with their crops? Or on supposing they could preserve their crops, which it is well known they cannot, how is the produce to be exported to the European markets?-Having said thus much to the general policy and justice of the Bill, give me leave to say a word or two to the expediency of it. Though the Bill were perfectly justifiable in every other respect, this at least will deserve your lordships' most mature deliberation; what force can you send out, with safety to yourselves, sufficient to carry this mass of oppression into execution? Recruits cannot be procured on any terms. Germans, it is well known, will not answer your purpose. The Russians cannot assist you, as they are likely to have employment enough nearer home; besides, administration affect to disclaim ever having any such intention, though I believe the contrary is well known to be true. Whence, then, are you to draw all your force? By the complexion of this Bill, I should be inclined to think the whole weight of this business is thrown on the navy; but will your lordships think it prudent to leave yourselves in a great measure defenceless at home, while the affairs of the north of Europe present themselves in their present form? I believe not. A storm, I am well informed, is gathering in that quarter. Russia and Sweden are making preparations for war. Prussia has interfered; and France, in case of an actual rupture, will give Sweden its promised protection, and that by a fleet. In such an event, I shall not insist, that a British fleet will become necessary in the Baltic; because I presume that none of your lordships can ima gine that Great Britain would remain inactive, and see France send a naval force into the northern seas; and that to act against the power in Europe with which

case this war should continue for any time, at once abandoned by his grace, and his friends on the other side of the House; and do they now falsify their own predictions, delivered with so much confidence, in order to hold up fresh bugbears of their own creating? We have now no longer any fears of an invasion from France. Our coasts are no longer in danger from that formidable enemy, who, according to the noble duke's information, is to be employed elsewhere. Sweden and Russia are preparing to attack each other. Prussia and France are to take respective sides in this quarrel. What, then, does this amount to; but that France, jealous of the increasing power of Russia, and in compliance with her engagements entered into with Sweden, will take a part in those disputes? Does not this prove to a demonstration, that France, operated on by her jealousies, and obliged by her treaties with Sweden, can never think of preventing or interrupting us in the prosecution of reducing our rebellious subjects? Such an attempt would be madness in any event; but on the present occasion would be directly militating against her own views. But supposing, my lords, that the matter really stood as the noble lords in opposition have frequently stated it; I will suppose, what I am sure is not the case, that it was both the interest and intentions of France and Spain, to prevent us from reducing our rebellious colonists into a state of legal obedience and constitutional submission, and that if we persisted in our declared resolution of asserting our rights, that we must expect to be engaged in a war with the united force of the House of Bourbon. Would that be a motive with your lordships, for submitting to your rebellious subjects in the present contest? I think it would not. I am sure it ought not. If a dread of a war with those powers should be a sufficient reason for such a disgraceful, spiritless conduct, I am well convinced it would have a directly contrary effect. Those powers would soon conclude, that a nation which had not power or force sufficient to coerce its own members, would be no longer a formidable enemy. They would look upon you as an abject, tame, mercenary people, who from a mere love of lucre, would consent to sacrifice all the pride, dignity, and superior interest of yourselves and posterity, rather than suffer a temporary inconvenience, or forego for a while the advantages derived from a commercial intercourse with your colo

nies. They, in fine, would look on you as a nation of merchants, from whom nothing was to be feared, totally emptied of that spirit of warfare, on every proper occasion, that martial ardour, native prowess, and thirst of fame, which have hitherto rendered you justly formidable and terrible to your enemies. Therefore I contend, my lords, that it is doubly incumbent on you to exert yourselves, even as a means of keeping your natural enemies and ambitious neighbours in that state of awe and reverence towards you, which will be always one of the best bulwarks of the national safety, and your own domestic tranquillity.-My lords, though I wish sincerely, that America, should she persist obstinately to resist the constitutional and equitable claims of this country, may be compelled to acknowledge them; yet I do not desire that the people of that country should be abridged of their ancient privi leges, such, I mean, as are consistent with the common interests of both countries; such as it is proper for us to grant or confirm, and for them to retain or enjoy. And whenever they return to a proper sense of their duty, I shall very readily give my support to any plan which may be the most likely to heal the unhappy wounds that have been already given, and for receiving them once more into the bosom of the mother-country. The noble duke has bestowed the hardest names he could possibly invent on this Bill; and to shew the folly as well as injustice of it, asks what it is we are contending for. Says the noble duke, the claim of taxation has been given up. It has been relinquished on the idea of its impracticability and inexpediency. I deny it. I contend it never has; and we know, that the main support given to it in the other House, as well as to the general measures respecting America, was on the supposition that a revenue is expected to be obtained from America, towards alleviating part of the heavy burdens at present borne by this country. We know these are the wishes and sentiments of the country gentlemen in the other House; men of the most independent principles and most ample fortunes in the kingdom. I will not pretend to say, to what amount, or in what mode America ought to be compelled to contribute. Perhaps in their present condition, the assistance they would be able to give to the mother-country would be but small; but I insist, a foundation ought be laid in the first instance, which should keep a