⚫ neceffary for those who support the motion, to prove, not only that the treaty of Vinena was never made, but that the falfhood of the report either was or might have been known by our minifters, otherwife those who are inclined to retain a favourable opinion of their integrity and abilities, may conclude, that ⚫ they were either not mistaken, or were led into error by fuch delufions as would no lefs eafily have impof⚫ed on their accufers, and that by exalting their ene

mies to their stations they fhall not much confult the < advantage of their country.

с

This motion therefore, my lords, founded upon no acknowledged, no indifputable facts, nor fupported by legal evidence, this motion, which by appealing to common fame as the ultimate judge of every 'man's actions, may bring every man's life or fortune into danger, this motion, which condemns without hearing and decides without examining, I cannot but reject, and hope your lordships will concur • with me *

、

This nervous speech was occafioned by one of the earl of Abingdon in fupport of the motion, which he grounded on the evidence of common fame. The drift of lord Hardwicke's fpeech is to invalidate that kind of teftimony, and in this he difplays the talents of a found lawyer and an eloquent orator; but the private virtues of Sir Robert Walpole were such, that few of his enemies wifhed for a greater punishment on him than the divefting him of power, and accordingly the motion contained no fpecific charge of crimes that called for public juftice: it tended to fhew that the minister had been inattentive to the complaints of the

Gent. Mag. 1741, page 402.

merchants,

merchants, averse to the profecution of the war, and unfkilful in the conduct of it, and that the councils of the nation had not profpered under his influence, and that these facts were notorious: these were furely reasons for his removal, and fuperfeded the neceffity of legal forms, and that kind of evidence which is required to fupport a bill of attainder or an impeachment. Lord Hardwicke's argument may therefore feem fallacious, but it was admirably calculated to elude the charge; he wilfully miftook the defign of the motion, and fet himself to invalidate the kind of evidence on which it was grounded, and to fhew its infufficiency to fupport a legal profecution, and fucceeding therein, his opponents thought their arguments refuted when in truth they were not.

The fpeech of Lord Chesterfield on a different fubject, and against a measure of a fucceeding, and, as it , was pretended, a purer administration, is as follows.

'My Lords,

The bill now under our confideration appears to me to deferve a much clofer regard than feems to have been paid to it in the other houfe, through which it was hurried with the utmost precipitation, and where it paffed almost without the formality of C a debate; nor can I think that earnestness with which fome lords feem inclined to prefs it forward here, confiftent with the importance of the confequences ⚫ which may be, with great reafon, expected from it.

It has been urged that where fo great a number < have formed expectations of a national benefit from any bill, fo much deference at least is due to their judgment, as that the bill fhould be confidered in a committee. This, my lords, I admit to be, in other cafes, a juft and reasonable demand, and will readily allow

I

allow that the propofal, not only of a confiderable ⚫ number, but even of any fingle lord, ought to be fully ⚫ examined and regularly debated, according to the ufual forms of this affembly. But in the prefent cafe, my lords, and in all cafes like the prefent, the demand is improper because it is ufelefs, and it is useless because we can do now all that we can do hereafter in a committee. For the bill before us is a money-bill, which, according to the present opinion of the clinabs*, we have no right to amend, and which therefore we have no need of confidering in a < committee, fince the event of all our deliberations muft be, that we are either to reject or pafs it in its prefent ftate; for I fuppofe no lord will think this a proper time to enter into a controverfy with the clinabs for the revival of thofe privileges to which, I believe, we have a right, and fuch a controverfy, the least attempt to amend a money-bill will certainly produce.

• To desire, therefore, my lords, that this bill may be confidered in a committee, is only to defire that it may gain one step without oppofition, that it may proceed through the forms of the house by stealth, and that the confideration of it may be delayed till the exigencies of the government fhall be fo great, as not to allow time for raifing the fupplies by any other method.

By this artifice, grofs as it is, the patrons of this wonderful bill hope to obftruct a plain and open detection of its tendency. They hope, my lords, that the bill fhall operate in the fame manner with the liquor which it is intended to bring into more

general use; and that as those that drink spirits are

* Commons.

drunk

drunk before they are well aware that they are drinking, the effects of this law fhall be perceived, < before we know that we have made it. Their intent is to give us a dram of policy which is to be swal⚫lowed before it is tafted, and which, when once it is fwallowed, will turn our heads.

But, my lords, I hope we fhall be fo cautious as to examine the draught which these ftate-empirics have thought proper to offer us, and I am confident that a very little examination will convince us of the pernicious qualities of their new 'preparation, and fhew that it can have no other effect than that of poisoning the public.

The law before us, my lords, seems to be the ' effect of that practice of which it is intended likewife to be the cause, and to be dictated by the liquor of which it fo effectually promotes the use, for furely it never before was conceived by any man intrufted with the administration of public affairs, to raise taxes by the deftruction of the people.

Nothing, my lords, but the deftruction of all the ' most laborious and useful part of the nation, can be expected from the license which is now propofed to be given, not only to drunkennefs, but to drunkennefs of the most deteftable and dangerous kind, to the abuse not only of intoxicating but of poisonous liquors.

Nothing, my lords, is more abfurd than to affert, that the use of spirits will be hindered by the bill now before us, or indeed that it will not be in a very great degree promoted by it. For what produces.

all kind of wickednefs but the

profpect of impunity

on one part, or the folicitation of opportunity on

the other? Either of these have too frequently been 'fufficient to overpower the sense of morality, and even of religion, and what is not to be feared from them when they fhall unite their force, and operate together, when temptations fhall be increafed and terror taken away?

с

It is allowed by those who have hitherto disputed on either fide of this question, that the people appear obftinately enamoured of this new liquor: it is allowed, on both parts, that this liquor corrupts the mind and enervates the body, and destroys vigour and virtue, at the fame time that it makes those who drink it too idle and too feeble for work, and while it impoverishes them by the prefent expence, difables them from retrieving its ill confequences by fubfequent industry.

It might be imagined, my lords, that those who had thus far agreed, would not eafily find any occafion of difpute, nor would any man, unacquainted with the motives by which fenatorial debates are too often influenced, fufpect, that after the pernicious qualities of this liquor, and the general • inclination among the people to the immoderate ufe of it had been generally admitted, it could be afterwards enquired, whether it ought to be made · more common, whether this univerfal thirst for poifon ought to be encouraged by the legislature, ' and whether a new ftatute ought to be made to fecure drunkards in the gratification of their ap< petites.

• To pretend, my lords, that the defign of this bill is to prevent or diminish the ufe of fpirits, is to • trample