The previous question was then put, "Whether the said question shall now be put?"

It was resolved in the Affirmative. Contents 90, Proxies 14—104; Non-Contents 29.*

The following Protest was thereupon entered:

Dissentient,

1st. The previous question was moved, not to prevent the proceeding in the Address communicated at the conference with the Commons, but in order to present the Petition of the North American Merchants, and of the West India Merchants and Planters, which Petitions the House might reject, if frivolous, or postpone, if not urgent, as it might seem fit to their wisdom; but to hurry on the business to which these Petitions so materially and directly related, the express prayer of which was, that they might be heard before "any resolution may be taken by this right honourable House respecting America;" to refuse so much as to suffer them to be presented, is a proceeding of the most unwarrantable nature, and directly subversive of the most sacred rights of the subject: it is the more particularly exceptionable, as a Lord in his place, at the express desire of the West India Merchants, informed the House, that, if necessitated so to do, they were ready, without Counsel or farther preparation, instantly to offer evidence to prove that several Islands of the West Indies could not be able to subsist, after the operation of the proposed Address in America. Justice, with regard to individuals, policy with regard to the publick, and decorum with regard to ourselves, required that we should admit this Petition to be presented. By refusing it, justice is denied.

2dly. Because the Papers laid upon our table by Ministers, are so manifestly defective, and so avowedly curtailed, that we can derive from them nothing like information of the true state of the object on which we are going to act, or of the consequences of the resolutions which we may take. We ought (as we conceive) with gladness to have accepted that information from the Merchants, which, if it had not been voluntarily offered, it was our duty to seek. There is no information concerning the state of our Colonies, (taken in any point of view,) which the Merchants are not far more competent to give than Governours or Officers, who often know far less of the temper and disposition of the people, or may be more disposed to misrepresent it than the Merchants. Of this we have a full and melancholy experience in the mistaken ideas on which the fatal Acts of the last Parliament were formed.

3dly. Because we are of opinion, that in entering into a war in which mischief and inconvenience are great and certain, (but the utmost extent of which it is impossible to foresee,) true policy requires that those who are most likely to be immediately affected, should be thoroughly satisfied of the deliberation with which it was undertaken; and we apprehend that the Planters, Merchants, and Manufactuers, will not bear their losses and burthens, brought on the by the proposed civil war, the better, for our refusing so much as to hear them previous to our engaging in that war; nor will our precipitation in resolving, add much to the success in executing any plan that may be pursued.

We protest, therefore, against the refusal to suffer such Petitions to be presented, and we thus clear ourselves to our country of the disgrace and mischief which must attend this unconstitutional, indecent, and improvident proceeding

Then the main question was put, "Whether to agree with the Commons in the said Address, by inserting the words 'Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and?'"

It was resolved in the Affirmative.

Dissentient,

1st. Because the violent matter of this dangerous Address was highly aggravated by the violent manner in which it was precipitately hurried through the House Lords were not allowed the interposition of a moment' time for deliberation before they were driven headlong into a declaration of civil war. A conference was held with the Commons; an Address of this importance presented all extraneous information, although offered, positively refused; all Petitions arbitrarily rejected; and the whole of this most awful business received, debated, and concluded in a single day.

2dly. Because no legal grounds were laid in argument or in fact to show that a rebellion, properly so called did exist in Massachusetts Bay, when the papers of the latest date, and from whence alone we derive our information were written. The overt acts to which the species of treason, affirmed in the Address, ought to be applied, were not established, nor any offenders marked out. But a general mass of the acts of turbulence, said to be done at various times and places, and of various natures, were all thrown together to make out one general constructive treason Neither was there any sort of proof of the continuance of any unlawful force from whence we could infer that a rebel lion does now exist. And we are the more cautious of pronouncing any part of his Majesty's Dominions to be in actual rebellion, because the cases of constructive treason under that branch of the 25th of Edward the Third' which describes the crime of rebellion, have been already so far extended by the Judges, and the distinctions there-upon so nice and subtle, that no prudent man ought to declare any single person in that situation, without the clearest evidence of uncontrovertible overt acts, to warrant such a declaration. Much less ought so high an authority as both Houses of Parliament, to denounce so severe a judgment against a considerable part of his Majesty's subjects by which his forces may think themselves justified in commencing a war, without any further order or commission.

3dly. Because we think that several Acts of the last Parliament and several late proceedings of Administration with regard to the Colonies, are real grievances, and just causes of complaint; and we cannot, in honour or in conscience consent to an Address which commends the temper by which proceedings so very intemperate have been carried on; nor can we persuade ourselves to authorize violent courses against persons in the Colonies, who have resisted authority, without at the same time redressing the grievances which have given but too much provocation for their behaviour.

4thly. Because we think the loose and general assurances given by the Address, of future redress of grievances, in case of submission, is far from satisfactory, or at all likely to produce their end; whilst the Acts complained of continue unrepealed or unamended; and their authors remain authority here, because these advisers of all the measures

condemned it in express terms, while the third, who was still high in office, did not by any means pretend to support it. It seems they were in some way overruled. But the manner in which a measure of Ministry was carried against the opinion of Ministers, was not explained.

It cannot be wondered, that such a disclosure relative to a matter which had already convulsed the whole Empire, and was still more to be dreaded in its future consequences, should excite the most general amazement, mixed with a great share of indignation and regret in particulars. The fatal and overruling secret influence, which, as they said had so long guided and marred all the puhlick affairs of the Nation, was accordingly deplored and animadverted upon in different parts of the House.

In the course of the heat, which sprung from much collateral matter that was thrown in upon this occasion, a series of arraignment, justification, assertion, denial, animadversion, and recrimination took place, in which many things passed, that were either new in that House or extraordinary in their nature. The learned Lord who had condemned the measure of laying on the American Duties in the year 1767, was himself, partly by implication, and in part directly, charged with having a principal share in those secret counsels, which had boon stigmatised as the most obnoxious and ruinous to the Nation; notwithstanding his repeated declaration, that he had not acted as an efficient Cabinet Counsellor for several years. These charges were urged and apposed with a degree of asperity, and a harshness of personal altercation, not often heard in that House; with violent threats on the one side, and general defiance on the other.—Ann. Regis.

* List of the Minority who Divided upon the Previous Question:—

DUKES.—Cumberland, Richmond, Devonshire, Portland, Manchester MARQUIS.—Rockingham.

EARLS.—Abingdon, Besborough, Cholmondeley, Coventry, Effingham, Fitzwilliam, Scarborough, Shelburne, Spencer, Stanford, Strafford, Tankerville.

VISCOUNTS.—Courtenay, Torrigton.

LORDS.—Abergavenny, Archer, Beaulieu, Camden, Craven, Forsscue, King, Sondes.

BISHOP.—Exeter. (Frederick Keppel)