that it greatly distressed him in his vote, when he wished well to one part of a bill, and looked upon the other part with horrour, and earnestly begged the motion might pass, as it would relieve him from great difficulties.

Mr. Byng observed, that the bringing in a bill of such importance as the present, looked as if Administration brought the bill in at this season of the year in order to avoid the opposition it would probably meet from the country gentlemen. The Minister was well aware that the country gentlemen could not be kept in town this season of the year.

Sir George Yonge objected particularly to the dispensing power given to the Commissioners, which he considered as lowering Parliament, and making it appear contemptible in the eyes of those upon the continent, who already entertained no very high idea of its free agency, and who must be satisfied that it would not voluntarily submit to such an indignity, and therefore was brought to submit to it by indirect means.

Lord North said, some were against the warlike part of the bill, others against the pacifick or conciliatory part, but that the most extraordinary reason, with those who wished for peace and supported this motion, was the dispensing power given by the pacifick clause; for, if the motion passes, the power of dispensing will be, of dispensing with the pacifick, and not with the hostile bill. He thought it fairer to declare against the bill in toto; that, he was sure, was the ultimate wish of those who wanted to divide it in two; and as such, he should strenuously oppose any motion of that tendency.

The House then divided. The yeas went forth:

Then the House resolved itself into the said Committee.

Sir George Hay supported the first clause with great earnestness. He said, no man in his senses could doubt but that America was in rebellion, nor that the present bill was to all intents and purposes perfectly justifiable and necessary. He expatiated on the criminality of the Americans, who, he said, were not to be considered in the light of foreign enemies, but as criminals of the blackest dye; as Rebels, who to the enormities of war added moral turpitude, and the basest ingratitude. He took a large compass in defending every part of the bill, and showed the principles upon which it was founded to be agreeable to the practice of nations on similar occasions, which did not, he said, strictly confine the State to the formalities of war in the reduction of rebellious subjects to obedience, but authorized the greatest severities, and even massacres. He enlarged upon the lenity of the bill, considered in that light, and concluded with a high compliment to his Majesty’s goodness in graciously condescending to bestow upon the captors the produce of the prizes.

Lord John Cavendish added to the applause due to his Majesty’s generosity in giving up the share to which the Crown is entitled of the spoils of the enemy; and he made no doubt, he said, but that the framers of the bill had been sufficiently exact in measuring out the several proportions of the plunder to those who were to share in the distribution. But who, said his Lordship, are to be the sufferers? From whom are the spoils to be taken? Not from the guilty, (supposing, for argument sake, a rebellion to exist in America,) not from Rebels in arms, but from peaceful merchants—men who dread nothing so much as war, and who abhor rebellion. Will the honourable gentleman, or any other gentleman in this House, venture to assert the Americans are in rebellion? The framers of the bill have repeatedly asserted the contrary, and have made it their boast, that Government have numerous friends in every one of the Provinces, who wait only to be protected, in order to declare their sentiments and display their loyalty. These are the men who, presuming upon their innocence, will be most likely to hazard their property at sea. And from these men, friends to Government and the peace of mankind, are the spoils to be taken, that are thus to be distributed in equitable proportions among the captors. If this is the way the friends to Government are to be rewarded for their zeal, who will have temper enough not to oppose? Or who that has lost his property by plunder, will not join in making reprisals. By the tenour of this bill, after it has passed into an act, if it does pass into an act, is there a man in America that will be safe in trade? What, then, are we about? Debating Whether we shall give a sanction to the military part of our people to rob the civil part, or whether all things shall be left to chance, and the whole frame of Government thrown into disorder. By this bill, those whom we maintain for the defence of property on this side the Atlantick, are to be employed in the ruin of property on the other; and the desperate and daring on the other side to be encouraged to make reprisals on the property of peaceable men in this. The honourable gentleman who spoke last seems only to have considered the bill in one point of view— the captures, the forfeitures, and confiscations, the sharing prize money, and the final condemnation; but has totally overlooked the sufferers. He condemned the bill as it stood, and was for dividing it.

Sir George Savile was equally severe on the bill in all its parts. He said, the Ministry, from a mere childish, sottish obstinacy, to hold their places, were at once risking their heads, and plunging the nation into certain ruin. He said, dead majorities and thin Houses were matters very favourable and encouraging to the Minister to persevere; but he assured the House that the thread, when drawn too fine, would at length break; for however they might vote or divide within these walls, when our manufactures were ruined, our resources stopped or dried up, and that we were engaged in a French or Spanish war, majorities would avail the Ministers very little: no majority would avail in such a critical state of things, much less one already universally execrated for its notorious venality, corruption, and blind submission to the mandates of a Minister, who was himself confessed on all hands to be far from being popular.

Mr. Attorney-General [Thurlow] entered into the ten dency of trade in general, and chiefly of that which the Americans haves of late carried on to their own particular emolument, but to the great disadvantage of this nation, and of the British merchants who trade to that country. He explained the conditions on which the Americans were permitted to trade with other nations in direct opposition to the terms of the Act of Navigation. He said, by that act the produce of America was first to be landed in England before it could be carried to any foreign markets to be disposed of. That upon their representing the hardship of this circumnavigation, which brought no profit to the parent State, permission was granted them to carry the produce of their country directly to neutral ports, on condition they should come to England and lay out the proceeds, or such part of it as they should have occasion to lay out in goods, with the British merchant or manufacturer. But, instead of performing that part of the condition, it has been their practice to lay out their hard dollars in foreign markets, where perhaps they can buy cheaper, and to come to England to trade on credit, perhaps for twelve, eighteen, twenty, or even thirty months, and that on goods on which there are seldom more than six or seven per cent, to be gained. In this manner those who are honest enough to trade fairly, according to the stipulated terms, have no chance of vending in America the goods bought here, as they cannot sell upon equal terms with those who buy so much cheaper abroad. Hence it is, that the clandestine dealer gains a fortune, while the fair trader can scarce live; and hence it is, that the foreign merchant draws away all the ready money, and the British merchant accumulates an immense debt. And these, said he, are the men for whom an honourable gentleman, in the course of this debate, expressed so great a tenderness. If this clandestine trade is stopped, which is the principal object of the bill, will any gentleman take upon him to say that the trade of Great Britain will suffer? The trade of Great Britain, on the contrary, will then be put upon an equal footing with that of other nations, and the British merchant have a chance to get his remittances in a reasonable time. With regard to the temporary inconveniences which the fair trader may suffer, they will be amply recompensed by the regulations which will of course take place when the present contest is finally decided; which the quicker despatch and the greater havock that is made among the people of the above description, the