it begets many inconveniencies, two of which are the impoverishing the People, and the increase of Taxes.

And here give me leave to fay, Sir, that no country can give more melancholy inftances of the effects of a military force than England can. The very army which was raised by the Parliament in defence of the fubjects, against some encroachments made by Charles the Ift upon their liberties, afterwards gave law to the Parliament itself, turned its Members out of doors, razed our Conftitution to the foundation, and brought that unhappy Prince to the block. This catastrophe, Sir, was not owing to the People; for of them, nine parts in ten were well affected to the person and cause of the King; but to their Army, which, like other wild beafts, turned upon and destroyed their keepers. After the Reftoration of the Royal Family, the Prince then upon the Throne raised a few guards, which never fwelled to above 5890; and yet fo jealous was the nation even of that small number, that he never could get his Parliament, proftitute as it was, to pafs over one Seffion without taking notice of them. This, Sir, was the more extraordinary, as the Parliament was never asked for any money for their fupport; and the money which was then raised for the support of the Government, was nothing when compared with the fums that have been granted fince. The next Parliament proved as uneafy to him on this head as the former had been; and were so distrustful of his intentions, that they appointed Commiffioners of their own, for applying the money granted for disbanding them, and it was paid into the Chamber of London. Nay, Sir, as a farther proof of the apprehenfions the Nation was under from a standing Army, they came to a Refolution, That the continuance of standing Forces in this Kingdom, other than the Militia, is illegal, and a great grievance and vexation to the People.' I have mentioned this period of our hiftory, Sir, to fhew, that notwithstanding the venality of that very Reign, the Parliament never could be brought to concur with what might one day overthrow both

K 3

their

If the nation was then

their own and the People's Liberties. fo jealous of an inconfiderable number, which did not coft it a fhilling, ought we confent to keep on foot fo formidable a number as eighteen thoufand? Sir, it is in vain for any Gentleman to fay, that the Army is under the direction of a wife and a juft Sovereign, who will never harbour a thought inconfiftent with the good of his fubjects. I am as thoroughly perfuaded of his Majesty's personal virtues as any Gentleman; but an Army, when it once finds its own power, may very probably refuse to take laws, even from that very Sovereign under whofe immediate direction they are. The Parliament's Army, Sir, was as abfolutely under the direction of the Parliament in the time of Charles the Ift, as any Army is now under the direction of his Majefty; and yet it is well known, they obeyed orders no longer than they found it convenient for themselves.

The period, Sir, from which we are to date the rife of our ftanding Army in Britain, is the ninth year of the late King William, when the Parliament granted an Army of ten thoufand men for the fervice of the current year. This was done, in confideration of the powerful faction at that time fubfifting in the kingdom in favour of King James. And if ever a standing Army can be of ufe at any time, it is at fuch a juncture. But nothing, Sir, can make fo palpable an infraction of the fubjects rights, as established at the Revolution, go down. Though this nation was then bleffed with a Prince that had hazarded every thing to free us from oppreffion and tyranny, and therefore could never be fuppofed to have any designs upon our Conftitution; yet many Gentlemen, who were friends of the Revolution upon principles of liberty, with one confent remonftrated against a standing Army, though but kept up from year to year, as fubverfive of the People's Rights, and of the Revolution principles.

Some I know, Sir, who appeared early for the Revolution, were fo much delighted with the funfhine of a Court, that

they

they joined in all its measures, though fome of them were found to be directly oppofite to the principles upon which the Revolution was founded: but we find that they, who ever were acknowledged to be the fincere well-wishers of that caufe, forfook them, and could never be brought to concur with them. in any one measure. On this account, Sir, these Gentlemen were branded by fome, who then fat in the Houfe, with the name of Jacobites and Republicans, two denominations of men equally enemies to the prefent establishment. But, Sir, there was this difference betwixt their antagonists and them, that the former never refused to concur with any measure pro pofed by the Court, and the latter never voted for any step tha was difliked by their country.

Their late deliverance from a Prince, who, by means of his Army, aimed at arbitrary Power, made them look back with fo much horror upon the precipice they had just escaped, that there was an exprefs Provifo againft ftanding Armies in times. of peace, inferted in the Claim of Right, which we may in some measure call the laft great Charter of our Liberty. I own that it gives me great concern to fee Gentlemen, who have always valued themselves upon treading in the footsteps of those who brought about the Revolution, act a part fo inconfiftent with the principles of their ancestors, by voting for this Queftion. I know a fet of men under a different denomination, who have always been more moderate in their pretences, but more fteady in their adherence to those principles. I am not at all inclined to revive any party diftinction; but I will venture to say, Sir, that let any man compare the conduct of some Gentlemen who have affected to pass for Whigs, with that of Gentlemen who have always been looked on as Tories, he fhall find the latter acting a part most consistent with the Revolution Principles. He will find them oppofing the Crown in every encroachment upon the People, and in every infringe ment of the Claim of Right. He never will find them complimenting the Crown at the expence of the People when in K 4

2

Poft,

Poft, nor diftreffing it by oppofing any reafonable Measure when out. Can fome Gentlemen, Sir, who now affect to call themselves Whigs, boaft of fuch an uniformity of conduct? Can they say that times and circumftances never influenced the Measures they pursued? Or that when they were in Office, they always acted in confequence of the Principles they profeffed when they were out? Sir, I believe I have fat long enough in this Houfe to convince Gentlemen, if there were occafion, of very great inconfiftencies in certain characters. But, Sir, I forbear it, because the eyes of fome of these Gentlemen feem to be now open, and I hope these distinctions are in a great measure either entirely abolished or better understood.

As no Question, Sir, is of greater importance, so none has 'been fo frequently debated in this Houfe as the present. Yet I never heard any Gentleman make a doubt, that a ftanding Army in time of peace was a grievance to the People of GreatBritain. But, Sir, the Tories always oppofed this Grievance. When his late Majefty, upon the Rebellion against him being fuppreffed, for the ease of his fubjects, ordered ten thousand of his troops to be difbanded, I remember a particular friend of mine, who always paffed for a Tory, propofed that it fhould be inserted in our Addrefs to his Majefty on that occafion, That nothing could more endear his Majesty to all his subjects, than his reducing the Land Forces to the old eftablishment of guards and garrifans, as his Majefty found it at his Acceffion to the Throne. This, Sir, happened in the fourth year of his late Majesty's Reign; and had his Majefty thought fit to have made the proposed reduction, or, rather, had he been advised by his Minifters to have done it, and had the Military Establishment continued on that footing till now, we fhould have discharged upwards of twelve millions of our national debt, and yet have enabled his Majefty to have made good fuch engagements with his allies, as tended to fecure the public tranquillity.

As

As to what the Honourable Gentleman, who fpoke laft mentioned with regard to reftraining the Liberty of the Prefs, and concerning the general depravity that obtains among the People, I fhall leave him to be answered by other Gentlemen, who can do it much better than I can. But I agree with the Honourable Gentleman fo far as to own, that the People are at prefent very much diffatisfied; and, as I think that ferment ought to fubfide gradually, I am willing to give my votė for a larger number of forces this Seffion, than perhaps I may think neceffary to be kept up the next. I therefore move, That the number of Land Forces for the fervice of the current year may be twelve thousand men.

Mr. Shippen, Jan. 28, 1738.

THE keeping up of a numerous ftanding Army in time of peace, is abfolutely inconfiftent with the liberties of this country. Gentlemen talk of an army of eighteen thousand men, as always neceffary to be kept up in this Inland. This, Sir, is the true fecret of this day's Motion: thefe Gentlemen know, that when peace is reftored, the nation will infift upon a reduction being made; therefore, think they, let us now increase the army, that when peace is restored we may ftop the mouths of the difaffected, (as they call them) by making a reduction of the troops we are now to add ; and thus, Sir, we fhall have a standing Army of eighteen thousand men faddled upon us for ever. As I am of opinion, that an army of eighteen thousand men is at least ten thousand more than we ought to have in time of peace; as I am of opinion, that fuch a numerous army can be neceffary for no end, but that of enabling a Minifter to trample upon the liberties of his country, I think the Motion ought to be rejected with disdain.

As for Ministers, they must not expect regard and esteem from their equipage, but from the wifdom and addrefs of their negociations for a Minifter with a blundering head, or one that is fent upon ridiculous errands, will make as forry a figure