circumstances, dangerously to increase the mutual enmity, so fatal to the interests both of Great Britain and America; and, by preventing a happy reconciliation with that country, to frustrate the earnest desire, graciously expressed by his majesty, to restore the blessings of public tranquillity." To this address his majesty returned the following answer :— "Gentlemen of the house of commons! There are no objects nearer to my heart, than the ease, happiness, and prosperity of my people. You may be assured, that, in pursuance of your advice, I shall take such measures as shall appear to me to be most conducive to the restoration of harmony between Great Britain and the revolted colonies, so essential to the prosperity of both; and that my efforts shall be directed in the most effectual manner against our European enemies, till such a peace can be obtained, as shall consist with the interests and welfare of my kingdom."

It was now confidently expected that lord North, in conformity with the manly language he had frequently held in debate, would have instantly resigned a post in which he was no longer supported by the confidence of parliament; but some secret reasons induced him still to linger in his seat; and he even defeated, by small majorities, several motions of the opposition which involved in them strong censures on the past conduct of the government. Confiding, however, in its increasing strength, the opposition resolved to bring this question to immediate issue. Accordingly, on the 8th of March, lord John Cavendish proposed a string of resolutions to the following effect: That, from the year 1775 to the present time, the nation had expended upwards of one hundred millions of money in a fruitless war, during which we had lost thirteen colonies, many our valuable West India and other islands; that the rest were in imminent danger; that we were now

of

engaged in an expensive war with America, France, Spain, and Holland, without a single ally; and that the chief cause of these accumulated misfortunes was, the united incapacity and misconduct of the ministry.

Of these resolutions the first three could not be disputed; but with regard to the fourth, which was a deduction from the others, Mr. Fox contended that a long uniform series of calamity and disgrace was a sufficient proof of misconduct; and farther, that weakness and folly distinctly marked each separate measure of every minister, as they collectively pervaded the whole system of administration. In reply to this it was contended by the minister, that it was unfair from misfortune to infer misconduct; but that, even if misconduct existed, it might be in the execution, and not in the plans. He, however, was aware that a direct and pointed answer to the charges could be of little avail, and therefore, with his usual dexterity in debate, he shifted his ground, and, to draw the attention of the house from the conduct of ministers, which was the question at issue, he called upon them to consider, if the present counsellors should be removed, by whom their places would be occupied? His lordship well knew that there were independent members in the house, who, though they disapproved lately of administration, were by no means desirous of being governed by a whig combination. By far the greater number of members who now formed the opposition, either originally were, or had become partisans of that connexion. He was aware that not only the Rockingham system, of ruling the nation by a confederacy, but also many of their opinions and measures, were by no means consonant to the sentiments of all who voted on their side. He asked, Whether the house was prepared to new model the constitution; to alter the duration of parliaments, and the rights of elec

tion? Would it consent to a violation of the national faith with the crown, by adopting a celebrated measure of reform in the civil list expenditure? Would it vote the independence of America, on which subject he understood there was as great difference between the two branches of opposition, as existed between the opposition and ministers ?

In this interesting debate, Mr. Henry Dundas greatly distinguished himself: he urged the house, before they voted for the removal of the present ministers, and throwing the government into the hands of their opponents, to have it thoroughly ascertained and accurately defined, what the objects of these members of opposition were; what system they proposed to adopt, and what measures they intended to pursue. These considerations had so much influence, that the supporters of ministers prevailed for the moment, and the resolution negatived by a majority of ten, which was followed by a motion for adjourning the house until the 15th instant. Several moderate and independent members now seemed anxious for a coalition, such as would prevent the country from being entirely governed by any party. Ministers themselves were not disinclined to that expedient; and during the adjournment, various attempts were made to give it effect, but to no purpose. On the 15th, sir John Rous made a motion similar to that which had been recently discussed. On this occasion, there were no less than four hundred and eighty members in the house, when ministers still carried the negative by a majority of nine.

Far from being disheartened by these repeated disappointments, the leaders of opposition immediately announced, that the resolutions would be again proposed; and accordingly, on the 20th of March, in a very full house, lord Surrey rose to make his promised motion. Before he had time to proceed, however, lord North entreated to have the opportu

nity of saying a few words. He rose, he said, to communicate to the house information which would make it unnecessary to proceed with a consideration of the question then before the house; in fact, it would require an adjournment. Some little confusion arose at this moment, from what was conceived to be an interruption of lord Surrey; but, on order being restored, lord North informed the house, that no administration existed; and immediately moved an adjournment until new arrangements should be formed. He then took his leave of the commons as minister, by thanking them for the support they had given him during so long a course of years, and in so many trying situations. He expressed his grateful sense of their flattering partiality towards him at all times, and their indulgence on many occasions. A successor of greater abilities, of better judgment, and more qualified for his situation, he admitted, might easily be found, but a successor more zealously attached to the interests of his country, more anxious to promote them, more loyal to his sovereign, and more desirous of preserving the constitution whole and entire, he might be allowed to say, could not be procured. His lordship concluded his speech by declaring, that he did not mean to shrink from the trial, but should always be prepared to meet inquiry; nay, he even demanded from his adversaries the strictest scrutiny.

Thus terminated the administration of lord North; a period, of which the greater part teemed with calamitous events beyond any of the same duration to be found in the annals of British history. His lordship certainly was not destitute of talents; he had wit and learning at command; but he possessed neither the acute penetration nor the sound and discriminating judgment of a great statesman. He was an intelligent financier; but some of his taxes were partial and injudicious. As a war minister he

cannot be extolled; his errors exposed him to ridicule, and his misconduct entitled him to censure. If, as has been asserted, he entered on the war with the colonists in repugnance to his private opinion, and allowed a court favourite to direct him, we cannot but blame his mean servility and time-serving hypocrisy. It is more candid, however, to suppose, that whatever truth there may be in the report of his subserviency to a power behind the throne greater than the throne itself, the war was of that description which suited his prejudices. In private life, he claimed the praise of goodnature and humanity; he was a pleasant companion, and a kind friend. And, however erroneous and hurtful the measures of his administration eventually turned out to be, the blame ought not to be restricted to ministers: the far greater part of it devolves on parliament, who by its approbation sanctioned the acts of government; and to the people themselves, of whom the greater part were eager for commencing and continuing a war. When the nation censures this disas trous and burdensome contest, productive of such an enormous load of debt and taxes, it is proper they should recollect, that the war originated with themselves; nor could it have been continued, so pertinaciously, without their concurrence.

Parliament having adjourned, a new administration was now formed, on as broad a basis as the nature of the case would admit. It included the most distinguished personages among the two great parties who divided the whig interest-the Rockingham party, which borrowed its name from the auspices of that amiable nobleman, and its vigour and popularity from the talents of Mr. Fox ;-and the other party, which, since the death of lord Chatham, had been accustomed to regard the earl of Shelburne as its political leader. The marquis of Rockingham was appointed first lord of the treasury; the earl of