called out into actual fervice, and made fubject to military law. Could any man think that the volunteers of Great Britain ever meant to undertake fuch an obligation? Minif ters might indeed have defired them to look at this bill, and then have informed them that they must stand to their bond. But could fuch a ftipulation have been in the contempla tion of the volunteers, when they enrolled themselves? Let any man look at the acts under which the fervices of the voJunteers were accepted, and he will fee that they were to be marched only in the event of a rumour of invasion or actual landing on the coafts; and let him judge, whether by the words Great Britain, uniformly accompanying thofe fti pulations throughout, the coafts of Great Britain alone were not in the contemplation of the volunteers, at the time of entering into fuch an engagement? The right hon. Gentle man might, no doubt, avail himself of the technical expreffions in the prefent act to give fupport to fuch a plea. The volunteers might have other battles to fight with Minifters. They had already conquered them, but it was only by flow degrees. When they beat them out of one trench, Minifters betook themselves to another. When the volunteers gained the power of refigning, that power was endeavoured to be limited to one half of their number. It was faid, however, that these two objectionable clauses should be done away. They had flood in the bill from the beginning, and might have been fooner perceived. He, for one, confeffed that the interpretation which one of thofe claufes was capable of receiving had never occurred to him. He thought thofe Gentlemen who introduced the bill might have pointed out the interpretation, which they must have been aware the claufe was capable of receiving, in an earlier ftage of the bill, and not have referved it till the bringing up of the report. Had it not been for the jealous caution of a learn ed Gentleman who fpoke in an early part of the debate, the claufe now alluded to might have been allowed to pafs in its equivocal form, which would have been a grofs violation of the faith pledged to the volunteers. The other claufe, it must be admitted, had not been objected to now for the fift time. The unjuft tendency of it had been pointed out in the Committee, by an honourable Member under the gallery. It was then, however, defended by Minifters; and now, for the first time, they are pleafed to give up this poft alfo to the volunteers. All mankind had agreed in the right of volunteers to refign, except the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who had not been able to form any opinion on the fubje&t'; at leaft, if he had, he feemed refolved to Z 2

keep

keep it to himself. Finding they could not do better, Minifters had at length brought in the prefent bill. They had at first denied the right of refigning: the Court of King's Bench fanctioned that right. The claufe now-alluded to took it away; and the honourable Gentleman hoped that the decifion of that day would again reftore it. He believed by the claufe, as it ftood at prefent, a great majority would be deprived of this right. But it was faid, they might refign on giving 14 days notice. It was, however, undoubtedly the opinion of the volunteers, that they might do fo at pleafure, without any notice whatever. Let it be recollected, that they were told on the firft of February, that the threatened invafion might take place in the fhorteft poffible period, and now on the 19th March, we are again to be informed, that 14 days notice must be given by any volunteer defirous of refigning. Thus, had it not been for the attention of the learned Gentleman (Mr. Erfkine), and the hon. Member under the gallery, fimilar difputes might have been revived. A new opinion of the Attorney General, and a new bill to explain the opinion of Minifters, might have been neceffary. But were these the only objectionable claufes in the bill? There are cafes in which a perfon may forfeit his exemptions by non-attendance, probably for 12 days, even when labouring under indifpofition. It is true he may regain his privilege by attending other 12 days, but how is this to be accomplished? Is his corps to be called out on purpofe to enable him thus to qualify himfelf? The thing was ridiculous; Minifters were deceiving the volun teers, and holding out to them immunities which they could never realife. Another circumstance which had been noticed by an hon. Friend of his (Mr. Whitbread) he thought was particularly deferving of notice. Would any man ierioufly fay that forty-four days fervice, in labouring of the ground, could be taken away from a farmer without injury to him? It was well known that contentions did fubfift between maflers and fervants; and that the latter were often ready to take every advantage. No man could view the fanction given by that claufe to a practice of this fort in any other light than as a kind of robbery. The time of an apprentice was his mafter's, not his own; by a folemn contract it had become to as much as any other property whatever. Yet by the prefent bill, apprentices are feduced from their mafter's fervice, and an inducement is held out to them to neglect his bufinefs. It is faid a compenfation will be given; but to whom? Not to the mafter, but to the apprentice. In the cafe of any improvement being to be

carried

carried on, which occafions the appropriation of any private property, to whom is the compenfation made? Why, furely, to the proprietor. This reasonable plan of proceeding, however, is departed from in the prefent inftance. The com penfation is taken away from the party who has a right to it, and is bestowed on another, as a recompence and inducement to him to defert his master's employment. The hon. Gentleman again alluded to the little progrefs that had been made in the defensive system during the prefent feffion, and declared his conviction, that he would not be wrong in afferting, that three fourths of the volunteers who had been embodied at an early period, had never yet drawn a trigger. If no plan to expedite the arming and training of the volunteers could be devised, he was afhamed to think what opinion their constituents must entertain of the deliberations of that House, marked as the prefent bill was with fuch prominent fymptoms of imbecility and weakness. The public had a right to expect, if Gentlemen reited their whole defence on a volunteer force, that they fhould have adopted fome steps to render it as efficient as poffible. They were entitled, at so awful a crifis, when armaments of an unparalleled and gigantic nature, and not only great but immediate, were to be opposed, to expect fomething like a proportionate defence. Like the poet, who lamented that in proportion to the fmaliness of our fupport, the evils which we had to encounter were great, he trembled at the danger to which we were expofed. He trembled the lefs, however, because he knew the fpirit of the volunteers. They had battled and fkirmished with Minifters, poft after poft. They had driven them from trench to trench, and were now come to engage them in their last war-dike. He was happy to think that the fpirit of the country and of the volunteers would rise fuperior, not to the attempts of our enemies alone, but, what he thought a more arduous tafk, fuperior to the imbecility of Miniliers.

The Attorney General could not at all fee that any argument had been adduced to fhew that the recommitment of the bill would be attended with the fmalleft advantage. It was contended by the hon. Gentleman who fuggefted the neceffity of the recommitment, that a great deal too much time had been already spent on the bill; yet with this admission, the great object he now appeared to have in view was, that the bill fhould ftill longer occupy the attention of the House, and all this for the proteffed purpose of preventing the character

of

of Parliament from being degraded. A great deal had been faid about the prefent defective state of our military establishment, but for his own part he could not fee how the recommitment had any thing at all to do with this business. Could any thing connected with the bill be done to increase our military establishment? Could going again into the Committee fill up any deficiencies in the army of referve? No man could fericufly urge fuch an opinion. The bill was defigned to explain and amend what at prefent appeared defective in the volunteer fyftem; but let it be fent back as often as Gentlemen pleafed to a Committee, it must still come out of the Committee in its original form-of a bill for the better regulation of the volunteer establishment. On the one fide of the House it was urged that the bill contained every provifion which was beft calculated to effect its object. If on the other fide it was argued that there were other provifions wanting to complete the efficiency of the bill, it was then for those who held this opinion, to have, on former occafions, expreffed their fentiments in the Committee. The bill had already paffed through three Committees, and it was rather fingular that none of thofe Gentlemen who now fo graciously fmiled complacence on each other in the profpect of having the bill recommitted, had ever thought of previously introducing their amendments. He begged leave to know what reafon there was to expect in another Committee fuggeftions which had not been brought forward formerly, and unless fuch an expectation was held out to the House, he could not fee why the report would not afford fufficient room for the reception of fuch amendments as appeared to be neceffary. The hon. Gentleman who fpoke lait had come down to the Houfe with the intention of giving his decided oppofition to the bill, but certain circumftances had fince occurred to alter his determination, and he was now contented with infifting on its recommitment. What thefe circumftances were he could not pretend to determine, for he could hardly imagine that they arofe out of any thing which had taken place on the prefent occafion. Was it the claufe which referred to the right of volunteers to refign, connected with corps which had engaged to ferve during the whole war, or the claufe, as the bill now ftood, which directed that on the appearance of an enemy off the coast of Ireland, the volunteers fhould be placed on permanent duty? If either of thefe claufes had been to be continued in the bill, or even if a doubt had been retained as to the expediency of continuing

the

the clauses, there might have been fome ground for going again into the Committee. When, however, the point was given up in both cafes, he was aftonished to hear the hon. Gentleman infifting on the recommitment of the bill. His right hon. Friend near him (Mr. Yorke) had made the conceffion on this fubject in the most handsome manner, and though he himself thought that it would be infinitely better to allow the bill to pafs as it now food, fo far as these claufes were concerned, he would not at prefent go into any argument on the fubject. As to the power of refignation, he did not mean now to detain the attention of the Houfe, This was a fubject to which, recollecting the opinion he had given, he could not advert without pain. He begged leave, however, to fay, that the observations of his honourable and learned Friend this evening, fufficiently proved that this opinion of his, which he admitted to be erroneous, was not taken up on light grounds. His honourable and learned Friend allowed with him, that volunteers were under a powerful obligation of honour and morality, and if he in giving his opinion as to the right of refignation, had pushed the matter too far, his conduct was not without material circumftances of explanation. He begged the Houfe to confider the opinion given in the Court of King's Bench was on a fpecific cafe. The Court had not taken up the matter generally, but had cautiously confined their decifion to the precife matter referred to their confideration. If the queftion of refignation had been brought before them on the grounds furnished by the claufe in queftion, he was not convinced that their decifion would not have been very different in its complection. He, on the whole, faw nothing which fhould induce the Houfe not to enter on the confideration of the report now, and thought that whatever improvements were intended could in this way be equally well received.

D. Laurence fupported the motion for the recommitment. His principal reafon for this was, that a number of the clauses now in the bill were introduced on a day (Saturday) when there was a very thin attendance of members. The bill was now feen for the first time as a whole, fince it had laft paffed the Committee, and it appeared to him highly proper that it should be now recommitted, to give an opportunity for full and fair difcuffion of this very interefting fubject. The hon. and learned Member expreffed his decided difapprobation on the claufes as they now land in the bill, with respect to the right of difiniffal, and the compenfation to be given to fer