that nothing of the kind has been hitherto felt, at least in my neighbourhood, which is deeply concerned in the American trade. I live in the midst of a great manufacturing country, the trade of which depends a great deal upon their intercourse with America; and yet I can say, from the best information I have been able to collect, that no decline or stagnation, in any of the great manufactures, has been yet felt. It is true, a want of employment among the nailers may possibly be a consequence of our present disputes with America; but if it should, I trust Administration will devise some mode of alleviating the miseries of men manifestly suffering in the cause of their country.

The Duke of Richmond. The noble Lord who spoke last, has at length confessed that the effects of our American war begin to be already felt, particularly among the nailers. It is not many days since the same noble Lord assured us, with great confidence, that the manufactures in his neighbourhood were in a most flourishing state; that the people were fully employed; and that new channels for disposing of the commodities formerly sent to America were happily opened. What does his Lordship now tell you? That a stagnation, at least in one branch, has commenced, and very modestly desires Administration to devise some means of compensating the sufferers. This, I must own, has to me a very odd sound. We have already voted four shillings in the pound. Our manufactures are on the decline; that must of course create a deficiency in the funds. The manufacturers will want employment, and something must be done for them. I think your Lordships ought to consider this matter in a very serious light before you proceed a step further. You should view the measures at large, and fairly conclude on the consequences, taken together. The noble Earl, lately in office, [Lord Dartmouth,] told us the last day we met here, that we were to have peace with America; that it was the fixed resolution of Administration to adopt conciliatory measures. Now what does he tell your Lordships? That we are in a state of war; that secrecy is the life and essence of such a state; that we should studiously conceal what everybody knows in one instance, and withhold secrets from this House, long since grown stale in the Rebel camp. The principle which seems to direct the policy of the noble Lord, is no less worthy of animadversion. He has no information himself, his friends have none, and he will hear none. In fact, his Lordship is as careful to keep every degree of information from this House, as from the Generals Lee, Putnam, or Washington; for when Mr. Penn delivered him the Petition, he did not think proper to ask him a single question. When Mr. Penn was, on the last day, examined at your Lordships’ bar, his Lordship showed a similar aversion to anything which might wear the most distant appearance of looking for information.

While I am up, and speaking on the subject of that day’s examination, I cannot avoid saying a few words on the conduct of one or two noble Lords. From the time that the House agreed to examine Mr. Penn till the day he was examined, I determined to have no sort of communication with him; yet, from what had fallen from the noble Earl in the blue ribbon, and the noble Earl lately in office, I wished to avoid asking that gentleman any questions which might probably be disagreeable, or embarrass him. Accordingly, when I came into the House, having previously drawn up a list of such questions as I thought proper to put to him, I went below the bar, and delivered him the paper, desiring him to object to such as he thought proper. He kept the paper a few minutes, and returned it to me with an assurance that the list contained not a single question he was not ready to answer. In this transaction, my Lords, I flattered myself that I had acted with all imaginable caution and candour. Yet, what was the consequence, but that the noble Earl who presides at the head of the Admiralty charged me with previously consulting the witness, with an intention, I presume, to fabricate a particular kind of evidence, on purpose to mislead this House. Such language was, in my opinion, extremely unparliamentary, and deserving of your Lordship’s discountenance and disapprobation; yet, after I had explained the matter nearly in the same Words I do now, what shall we say to the unjustifiable conduct of another noble Lord, [Lyttelton,] who again repeated the same charge, mixed with a direct imputation, that the witness gave a partial testimony? But this is the noble Lord, my Lords, who stands up so warmly for Parliamentary order and the decorum of debate, and so severely condemns the noble and learned Lord on my right hand, [Lord Camden,] for being guilty of what he calls a violation of it. It is true, I always hear that noble Lord with infinite pleasure and delight: he speaks so finely, so harmoniously; his elocution is so charming, and his action so just and striking, that he affords me no small degree of entertainment—scarcely Mr. Garrick himself more; yet, before the noble Lord is so very ready to censure others in respect of transgressions, such as he now attributes to the learned and noble Lord, he should recollect how ready he is himself to offend in a similar manner. His Lordship has laboured greatly to reconcile the learned Lord’s expressions to each other. Your Lordships, I dare say, are already perfectly satisfied of his ability in that way. He has a knack of reconciling very strange things indeed; I hope he will be able to reconcile his conduct on the first day of the session, and the part he has since taken. I need not hope it, I may rest assured, that his Lordship is able to reconcile greater difficulties and contradictions than even that itself. His Lordship will, however, excuse me, if I think his ingenuity would be better employed in immediate relation to himself, than about any matter respecting the noble and learned Lord. On the whole, my Lords, I cannot help observing that the conduct of Administration has been very extraordinary. The noble Earl in the blue ribbon has told you he has been deceived. The noble Earl at the head of the Admiralty has told you that he deceived your Lordships relative to the naval arrangements of last year, lest, if he had made the necessary demands, you would have withheld your support. A noble Lord in the other House pledged himself that an army of ten thousand men would look America into submission. The same noble Lord has again undertaken to perform the same task with twenty-five thousand men. What, then, in such a state of imposition, confessed weakness, and contradiction, have your Lordships to direct you? Why, the noble Earl in the blue ribbon desires you, very gravely, to place an implicit confidence in Administration. He tells you, that no miscarriage can happen if you will trust him and his brethren in office. This is speaking pretty confidently, and with no small degree of hazard. I presume his Lordship is not ignorant of the true purport of such language in this House; it is no less than fairly engaging in measures, the consequences of which the Ministers’ heads are to be answerable for. If, therefore, the present motion should be overruled, and this implicit confidence in Ministers should be deemed advisable, I hope that the doctrine will be accepted of in all its parts: trust the executive power, and let the executive power be eventually responsible to the legislative for all the consequences.

Earl of Dartmouth. I am much obliged to any noble Lord who rises to remind me of anything I have said in a former debate. I am doubly so to the noble Duke who spoke last, for assisting my memory to words so justly expressive of my real sentiments. I said it was the intention, the most earnest wish of Administration, to adopt measures of conciliation, nay, of concession. I avow myself still of the same opinion. I affirmed, early in this debate, that both countries are in a state of war; that secrecy, respecting our operations and the state of our troops, was become necessary. I think, in all this, there is nothing versatile nor contradictory. If absolute war were finally agreed on, I presume his Grace would not contend that peace would not be the ultimate object. How, then, can the noble Duke conclude, from my saying that this country is in a state of war, that consequently the views of Administration were directed to the conquest of America: when in the same breath I added, that the armaments, both by sea and land, were made chiefly with an intention of protecting such in America as continue well-affected to the mother country, and restoring them to the liberty of acting conformably to their own sentiments? I repeat again, that I have no sort of disinclination to gratify the curiosity of the noble Duke who made the motion, were the information to be confined to the object barely of the present question; but understanding from the learned and noble Lord who spoke early in debate, that other information of the same nature will be desired. I must, for that reason, give it my hearty negative.

Lord Viscount Dudley. I do not retract my former assertion, that the manufacturers in my neighbourhood were never