'I

DEFENCE.

STAND up to agree in fome part with the Honourable Gentleman who spoke laft: if we are at prefent in any unhappy fituation, and if it be but thought, by any Gentleman in this House, that that fituation is any ways owing to the mifmanagement of thofe in Adminiftration, in my opinion, whoever thinks fo, ought to move for this House's going into fuch an inquiry; they ought to move for the House's going into a Committee on the State of the Nation, and upon the foot of fuch an inquiry, I will willingly join iffue with the Honourable Gentleman, or any other Gentleman in this House. Whenever the House fhall refolve upon going into such a Committee, I promife, that fo far as lies in my power, nothing shall be refused that is thought proper or neceffary for giving the House all the information that can be wifhed or defired. But as that time is not yet come, I must think that the Motion now under confideration is very irregular, and seems calculated rather for giving Gentlemen an opportunity of declaiming against those, who have the honour of serving the Crown, than for procuring any proper information to the House, or any advantage to the country.

1

It is ufual for fome people to make Motions, rather to fix unpopular things on others, than to have any information for themselves they make Motions in order to make a figure in the Votes, which are fent to all parts of the nation, and to ferve fome particular ends of their own: when a negative is put upon any such Motion, they are then ready to cry out, "we would have relieved you, we would have extricated you "from all the difficulties you labour under, but we were by power denied the means of doing it." This is a piece of management; it is a fort of parliamentary play, which has always been practised by those who oppofe the meafures of Adminiftration.

N 4

miniftration. I remember it as long as I remember Parliaments, and have by my own experience been acquainted with it: I can remember Motions made with no other view but to have a negative put upon them; and particularly at the beginning of a Seffion, the language amongst fuch Gentlemen has always been, "We must give them no reft, but make "Motion after Motion; if they agree in any Motion we make, "it will diftrefs them; and if they put a negative upon every "one, it will render them odious amongst the People."

This, I fay, has always been the conftant practice of those who are refolved, at any rate, to oppofe the Administration; but I must take notice, that to say that any Motion in Parliament is refufed by power, is, in my opinion, a very unpar→ liamentary way of fpeaking: when any Motion is made, every Gentleman is at liberty to debate with freedom upon it, and to agree or disagree as he thinks reafonable: if it be rejected, it must be by a Majority of the Houfe, and becomes an act of this Houfe; and to fay, that what is the act of the House, is an act of power, is not, I think, fpeaking in the language of Parliament.

Sir Robert Walpole, Jan. 23, 1734•

My honourable friend was pleafed to inveigh very feverely against the luxury and vice that reigns too generally amongít us. I know not from what this luxury and vice proceeds; but proceed from what it will, I am sure it does not proceed from any example fet by the Royal Family: for I am perfuaded that every Gentleman who hears me, is fenfible that no nation was ever bleft with a Royal Family that has given such eminent inftances of frugality and temperance, as the Family that is now upon the Throne. If a People, Sir, grown wanton with liberty and riches, fhall degenerate into luxury, is a Prince or his 'Minifters to be blamed for that? Or if the People is tainted with difcontent and diffatisfaction, are we to endeavour to cure it by giving up the only means of restrain

ing them? Yet this, Sir, is the very thing for which fome Gentlemen have argued fo ftrenuously fince the opening of this debate. It has been allowed on all hands, that had it not been for our ftanding forces, the nation must have, ere this time, run into confufion from that fpirit of diffatisfaction that has broke loofe among the People. But, fay fome Gentlemen, that spirit is occafioned from the oppreffion of the Government. But they have not been pleased to give us any inftance of such oppreffion; they have given us no inftance of an invasion upon the liberty and property of any subject; they have not given us one inftance of any encroachment of the military upon the civil power, or of one attack that has been made by the Adminiftration to fubvert the freedom of Parliament. There is nothing more common, Sir, than to raise a clamour upon the topics of bribery, corruption, and venality; and nothing more eafy than to make the People believe, that when an Administration continues long in the fame hands, it can only be by thefe means. But this is a misfortune that has attended the best Administrations in all ages and in all countries. The very fuccefs that Minifter meets with, is improved by his enemies to his prejudice. If a Majority in this House concur with his measures, it must be the effects of corruption. If he has the favour of the Prince, he owes it to flattery and mifrepresenting the ftate of the nation. Does the kingdom under his Administration enjoy a profound peace and extended commerce, this is attributed to the Minifter's facrificing fomething still more valuable than these advantages in order to procure them. So that, Sir, the very well-being of a state, gives a handle to clamour against the Minifter: whereas, in reality, his success ¡n the Parliament may be owing to the juftness of his meafures; the favour he is in with his Prince, to his integrity; and the increase of the national wealth and power, to his vigilance and the firmness of his refolutions. Sir, I shall make no particular application of what I have faid here; only one

thing I will be bold to affirm, that had the clamours that have been raised in Great-Britain these eighteen years past against the Administration been well-founded, we must before this time have been the most miserable, the most beggarly, and the most abject People under the fun.

Sir Robert Walpole, Feb. 3, 1738.

I THINK a man is an honeft man, who votes according to what his confcience tells him the prefent fituation of things. requires; and an honeft man, Sir, if he fees the circumstances which induced him to vote in favour of a Refolution last year altered, or if he finds that he himself has been mistaken in the apprehenfion of thefe circumftances; I fay, Sir, an honeft man will, in either of these cafes, vote this Seffion directly contrary to what he voted before: if ever I voted for a standing army, Sir, in time of peace, it was when my confcience told me, that the preservation of our liberties required it. But, Sir, though at that time, perhaps, I was convinced that our keeping up a ftanding army for one year was neceffary, it does not follow that I act inconfiftently, if I don't vote for a perpetuity of that army. Therefore, though a Gentleman has voted for every Question, for every job of the Miniftry; though his whole life has been but one continued vote on their fides; yet he ought neither to be ashamed nor afraid to oppofe them, as foon as his own judgment, or the fituation of things is altered. This is acting upon no other principles, Sir, but those of an honeft man, and a lover of his country: and, as the diftinction between Whigs and Tories is now in effect abolished, I hope foon to see our People know no other denominations of party amongst us befides thofe of Court and Country. The Honourable Gentleman talks of the establishment of the Government, and of the Adminiftration; but, Sir, I know of no Eftablishment, I know of no Government, I know of no Adminiftration that ought to be kept up, but for the prefervation of the

Liberties

Liberties of the People: for it is not two-pence matter to me, whether the Prince's name under whom I am to be enslaved, is Thomas, James, or Richard; I am fure I fhall never be enflaved under a George.

William Pulteney, Efq; Feb. 3, 1738.

THOSE employed in the Administration of affairs, are always in the moft ticklish fituation. If they propofe to make provisions against danger, by which provifions the People muft be put to an expence, they then are charged with raifing imaginary dangers, in order from thence to take an opportunity to load the People with new Taxes: and their misfortune is, that the more careful they have been in time paft, the argument grows every day more ftrongly against them; because people begin at last to believe, that the dangers which were never felt were imaginary, though in reality they were prevented only by the provifions that were made against them. However many people may come at last to be confirmed in this erroneous opinion, by which the Minifters may be at laft refused those provifions that are actually neceffary; and, if by fuch refufal, any fignal misfortune should befal the nation, the Minifters would be fure to be loaded with the blame of it, though they had done all that was in their power to warn us of the danger.

I cannot really comprehend, Sir, what fort of information it is that Gentlemen want. Would they have his Majefty fend to tell us, that there is a bloody war carried on by France, Spain, and Sardinia, against the Emperor? Surely they do not expect that his Majesty should send us a particular Message, in order to acquaint us with a piece of news that is known to the whole world!

Sir Robert Walpole, Feb. 14, 1735

I WAS a little furprized to hear it faid by the Honourable Gentleman who spoke laft, that this Motion's being oppofed

by

Π