have explained the fubftantial merits on which he defends this meafure. If it were confiftent with regularity, he should wish to afk, whether there had been any promife or engagement with the co tributors to the Loan of 18 millions, that there was to be no other Loan for the year?

The Chancellor of the Exchequer faid, as to the principle of the measure, he had scarce heard any Gentleman who had commented upon the terms of a Loan, and even blamed them, who had not also at the fame time always ftated it as his opinion, that he wifhed the Subfcribers fhould have a fair advantage, and that their advantage fhould be rather above moderate profit than under it. The reafon of this was plain. It was not wife for a great Nation to set the example of driving so hard a bargain, that must reduce the contractors in the event to ruin and beggary. If the bargain eventually turned out fuch as induced great lofs to the Subscribers, upon this principle it was much better that the Public fhould divide the lofs with them. The Public expence would be comparatively trifling; but ruinous if the whole. refted upon the individual. What in fact was this Loan?--open to every one that chofe to come in. If Gentlemen thought that pecuniary exertions were at that period neceflary for the service of the country, and that their political opinions did not preclude them from giving that affiftance; this Loan, so open to every one, was now reprefented as a job---as a trick to ferve the friends of Government. Surely there never was fo odd a plan. of ferving friends; or one that had been fo difobliging in its confequences. But it was natural that thofe fhould condemn the men, who endeavoured to render pecuniary fupport to the country, who thought fuch a measure not juftifiable, and acted the direct contrary way. But the Loan was now depreciated 14 per cent.; and furely the Houfe would not think, that fo heavy a lofs ought to be borne by the Subfcribers. With regard to the question urged by the Honourable Gentleman, he had repeatedly stated at that time that he did not believe he should have occafion to bring forwards any other Loan for the remainder of that year; and unquestionably they acted upon that perfuafion; but calamitous events, and unforeseen circumftances, had rendered a fubfequent Loan neceffary. Upon the whole, he thought the Houfe would be of his opinion, that the measure was not only reasonable but juft. Nor did the meafure depend alone upon principle: for in the year 1759 the intereft of the contributors to a Loan was allowed to commence half a year fooner than was fixed by the terms of the bargain, which gave an advantage to the fubfcriber of 24 per cent. On every ground of policy therefore he felt it to be his duty to bring forward and to fupport this propofition.

Mr.

1

Mr. Sheridan obferved, that properly fpeaking there were three parties to be confidered in a Loan. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Subscribers to the Loan, and the Houfe of Commons. Taking it in this view, the Chancellor of the Ex chequer had deceived the original fubfcribers, and was now about to impose upon the House, and defraud the public. With refpect to the 18 Million Loan, the fubfcribers might be taught to believe that there was not to be another Loan, but the Chancellor of the Exchequer could not expect any thing but that there must have been another Loan, for at that very moment he knew there was a deficiency of feven millions. He took notice of what the Minifter had faid upon extraordinary events happening in Europe. He did not fee that there was any reason for the Minifter being astonished at what had happened. He then took notice of the merit of the fubfcribers to this Loan. He was willing to give them full credit for their public spirit; but the measure of the Chancellor of the Exchequer made it a fpecies of felfish public fpirit, and a mercenary avaricious generofity. If they were left to bear the whole of this lofs they would be entitled to the character of patriots; but this measure took away all the grace of their public ardour. He obferved alfo, that fhould it ever happen that this bargain might turn out profitable to the fubfcribers by the increafe of the funds, there was no provifion for the return of one pound one to the public of what was now propofed to be voted to thefe loyal, money-lending Gentlemen. Indeed it was quite ridiculous to pronounce any panegyrics on the loyalty or the patriotifm of fubfcribers to Loans. It was better, because honeft, to confefs that they come forward with a Loan in expectation of profit. The Minifter knew this; he had by this Loan loft much of his credit with the monied men; he wished to reftore himself to their favour, and therefore he came now to the House to ask them to repair his credit out of the public purse.

He had heard, he faid, with aftonifhment, that many Gentlemen had given their votes that this money fhould be raised upon the public, which money was, a great part of it at least, to go into their own pockets, for many of them were subscribers to the Loan. He could not conceive any thing more indecent nor more indifcreet. He wifhed it might be understood that Mr. Pitt had not a power of Attorney from the House of Commons to conclude any bargain for them; and if this measure paffed, he was serious when he faid he should propofe as a proper punifhment that it fhould be paid by a tax on all places above 500l. a-year. At a time, let Gentlemen say what they pleased, when the Houfe of Commons was extremely unpopular, and deferved to be fo, for Gentlemen to difgrace its proceedings by votes fo

mean

mean and felfish, was madnefs. From Minifters they expected nothing but deception. But if thefe proceedings were carried on, the House of Commons would become more unpopular even than the Minifters. From the one the people expected only to be cajoled and plundered; but from the Houfs they had expected at least fome attention to their interefts; however, they had been difappointed in fuch expectations. This was indeed taking away part of the public odium from the Minifter and fixing it upon the Houfe of Commons. Gentlemen should beware of doing this when they faw fuch bodies of men in a state of defperate infubordination, for they would increase the danger which now threatened the State, by rendering the Houfe of Commons despicable in the eyes of the people. There was one point more which he mult prefs in the way of a question, and he expected an anfwer from the higheft authority in that Houfe. He wanted to know whether any Member of that Houfe ought to be permitted to vote on a queftion in which he was interested perfonally and in a pecuniary fenfe? They could not even be examined as witneffes in fuch a cafe in a Court of Law, and they would be objected to by the fame rule as jurors. He hoped thefe Gentlemen would feel the delicacy of their prefent fituation, and withdraw when the question was put, and if they did he doubted very much that the Minifter would be fuccefsful upon the prefent Motion.

Mr. Secretary Dundas rofe in confequence of the last obfervation which had been made in the courfe of this debate. With refpect to the conduct of any individual Member, he apprehended that nobody had any right to question the motive of it; that must be left as a queftion of confcience and individual feeling. Every man knew beft himself whether he deferved fuch imputations as had been thrown out to-night or not, and he knew of no means of deciding it. He then entered upon the merits of the fubfcribers, and defended the prefent propofition in their favour. He believed that many Gentlemen had fubfcribed upon the pureft motives, and others with more mixed designs ---but if a Gentleman had fubfcribed part of his property with a design to affift Government, and had taken less than perhaps he could have elfewhere made, he moft certainly deferved praife. He thought that Gentlemen might, if they pleased, retire from delicacy upon this point, because they were fubfcribers, but he thought there was a duty upon them paramount to all others, which included feelings of honour as well as every other confideration: he meant the duty of a Member of Parlia ment to express by his vote his opinion upon every public meafure that came before him, and upon that view of the fubject he had made up his mind to vote for the question. Should there

be

be any difficulty upon the point of influence, which he did not feel, for although he was a fubfcriber to the amount of 10,000l. he was above being influenced in his vote for a few hundreds. He trufted that other Gentlemen felt as he did; but should there be any difficulty upon that fubjet, Members might declare their intention of not benefiting by the measure which was now propofed.

Lord William Ruffell difapproved of this measure highly. He thought nothing of the patriotism of thefe fubfcribers, if they accepted of the price which was now propofed to be given for it. Such would be patriotifm brought to market, and knocked down by the hammer to the best bidder. There were, however, Gentlemen among thefe fubfcribers who really felt as patriots ought to feel, and who diffented from this measure, among whom he mentioned, to his honour, Mr. Hoare, a banker, who was a fubfcriber to the amount of 50,000l.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer and Mr. Secretary Dundas faid each a few words in explanation.

Mr. Manning faid, he felt great anxiety upon the prefent quef tion. He wished to do complete juftice, and to do neither more nor less than his duty. He wifhed, with fubmiffion, to put to the Chair a queftion, which was, whether a Member of that Houfe, who was a fubfcriber could, with propriety, and confiftently with the practice of the Houfe, vote upon the prefent question? He was not in the Houfe the preceding day. He therefore had not yet voted. He wanted information upon that point. This was not a remote or contingent intereft in the Members of the Houfe who were fubfcribers, but a direct pecuniary intereft. He fhould be extremely forry to withhold his vote, if it was right to give it; he fhould be as forry to give it, if the practice of the Houfe was against his voting.

The Speaker" Having been appealed to in fo diftinct a manner by the Honourable Member who fpoke laft, it is my duty to ftate to him, and to the Houfe, what appear to me to be the rule and practice of the Houfe upon queftions of this nature. I have always understood the rule and practice of the Houfe to be, that no Member can regularly (fubject to fome qualification) vote on any question which involves in it an immediate intereft of fuch Member. This, I have faid, is fubject to fome qualification. I will not detain the Houfe by entering into the detail of that qualification at prefent. But when any measure is fubmitted to the Houfe, the fubftance of which is to confer a pecuniary advantage, or diminifh a lofs, which is the fame thing, I am fatisfied it is not confiftent with that mode of proceeding which the Houfe has adopted on occafions of delicacy and importance, that any Member should vote on a mea

fure

fure by which he intends to derive any benefit in cafe that meafure fhould be carried into law."

Mr. Manning faid be was much obliged to the Speaker for delivering fo clear an opinion; and after a few words, expreffive of his fituation of a Bank Director and Subfcriber to the Loan, declared he fhould decline voting upon this question.

The Speaker." I am extremely delirous of being distinctly understood by the Houfe upon this important queftion. It does not appear to me to be poilible for the Houfe, under any exifting rule or order, to preclude any Member from voting. But I will state what appears to me to be the practice of the Houfe as far as my researches have gone. The only precedent that I have been able to find analagous to this cafe, is to be met with in the latter end of the laft century, in 1664; there it appears that a Member voted in a queftion in which he was directly interested, and his vote was difallowed afterwards on a division. If, therefore, any Members vote upon a question which includes that species of intereft in the opinion of the Houfe, the Houfe may afterwards difallow their votes. I muft, however, add, that this applies to benefits which they expect and intend to derive. If Members who may be entitled to benefit fhall fay they do not intend to derive any, it will be for the House to judge, whether they will allow their votes. This, I underftand, to be the rule and practice, as appears upon the Journals. The House may undoubtedly make an order for the prefent occafion if they think proper. But as the practice ftands, the Houfe, although it cannot preclude any Member from voting, may, after the divifion, annul the votes that have been given under the circumstances which I have stated."

The Secretary at War faid, that he had no motive for offering a word upon the fubject, but his fenfe of the great importance attending the point now ftarted, and his wifh to prevent the House receiving a wrong impreffion from the rule they had heard from the Chair, to which rule, and the authority it came from, he implicitly fubfcribed; but if taken in the extent to which Gentlemen might wish to carry it, it would go to affect the character and conftitution of the Houfe; for few questions could arife in which fo many Members would be interefted. He knew no law that Members fhould not fubfcribe to a Loan; and why, being Members, fhould they be precluded from voting for that Loan? The true diftinction he conceived to be this: the rule applied only where the private intereft was great, and the public intereft fmall; but in this cafe the private intereft was fmall and the public great, and therefore he would vote for the motion. He was no fubfcriber; but if he was, that should not restrain him from voting. It was eafy to fee that this, like 9&2

every