to those bills of punishment would have ever happened; or if they had, the mischiefs would have been corrected or suppressed instantaneously, and the Colony, and of course the whole continent, would, by this time, have been in a state of perfect tranquillity and obedience. On the whole, my Lords, so far from disapproving, with the noble Duke, of the Charter Bill, or wishing it had never passed as a measure of Government, all I have now to lament is, as a means of preventing all the ill consequences which have since happened, that it was not thought of and carried into execution at a time when, I will venture to affirm, it would have been productive of the most happy and salutary effects.

The Earl of Shelburne. I came down this day to the House with the intention of seconding the motion made by the noble Duke, because I think it the only measure now left which can possibly extricate us from that inevitable destruction which awaits us, should we obstinately persist in our present wild and romantick system of conquest and coercion, which I perceive is possessed by several who, I fear, have influence enough to cause the dangerous experiment to be made. I have, from the very beginning of this melancholy business, been always of opinion that a middle path might be hit on by which this country may be enabled both to acquit herself with honour, and to diffuse the blessings of her once happy Government to her American subjects, without sacrificing those interests which I shall always be as zealous to retain as any one of your Lordships; meaning, however, to be understood on this clear principle, that the power of taxing themselves, and the rights enjoyed by Charter, must be preserved to the Colonies inviolate. I shall ever think that any attempt to deprive them of either of those will be no less unjust in principle than impracticable in the execution. I know, even after this, after concession on our side and submission and confidence on theirs, a great deal will still remain to be done. Much must be trusted to the wisdom, integrity, and moderation of Ministers. They will have many great and uncommon difficulties to encounter. I foresee many of them. The disposition of the army, in particular, I predict, will be the source of great doubt, and no small contrariety of sentiment both here and in America. I, however, put in my claim to be understood as by no means giving up or being willing to relinquish the right inherent in the Sovereign, of ordering, directing, and stationing the army in whatever part of this empire he may think proper; and I confess it is with no small degree of astonishment and uneasiness I have heard doctrines of a very different nature maintained within this House by several noble Lords, whose more peculiar business it is to watch and take care that his Majesty’s just prerogatives be maintained entire and undiminished in all their parts: I particularly allude to the transactions in Ireland, and the language held by the Parliament of that kingdom. It is true, I have a very considerable property in Ireland, and have its interests sincerely at heart, but nevertheless I would not wish to advance them at the expense of this country. Besides, I am convinced that any partial favour granted to that kingdom, unless in points of local advantage, which do not interfere with the control and supremacy of this, would in the end be no real advantage to it. If the laws against Catholicks be cruel and impolitick; if the monopoly claimed by this country, in some instances, be liable to the same objection; if any laws are wanting which may encourage domestick industry and promote cultivation,—none of your Lordships would be readier to agree to any scheme which might conduce to ends so salutary and desirable: but when I hear it asserted that the military force of this empire is to be divided into separate establishments, not under the immediate control of the Sovereign; when I hear it maintained that it is not competent for his Majesty to send foreigners, under the sanction of a British Parliament, into any part of the empire, for its particular defence or for the safety of the whole; when I hear that a certain local military establishment is fixed, and, as it were, locked up in Ireland so as not to be called forth as the exigencies of affaire may require; I cannot forget my duty so much as to be silent, and not express my most hearty disapprobation of doctrines so derogatory of the prerogative of the Crown, and the controlling and superintending power of the British Parliament. As to the question immediately before your Lordships, I look upon it as the only one now left for our national salvation. It admits of but one plausible objection, which is, that should we now recede, it would operate as an encouragement to America to rise higher in her demands, on a supposition that our conceding at this particular crisis would induce her to conclude that timidity and a consciousness of our own inability, not a love of justice, were the true motives. Granting everything which may be built on this argument to have great weight, I would only oppose to it this one consideration urged by a noble Duke, [of Richmond,] that should this turn out to be true, it would give the friends of Government such a superiority, such a concurrence of hearts and hands, as would be more than a sufficient counterbalance for any inconvenience which might arise from the suspension of arms proposed by the motion now on your Lordships’ table. On the whole, I can see no solid objection to your Lordships agreeing to it: I perceive innumerable forcible reasons for your acquiescence. I fore-see the possibility, if not the strong probability, of our being compelled to engage in a foreign war. I am convinced that the present schemes of conquest and coercion are unjust; I am satisfied they are impolitick; and, as such, heartily unite in opinion that the present motion ought to be agreed to on every principle of humanity, equity, and sound policy.

Lord Lyttelton. Though I do not think that the noble Lords who support this motion, nor any other noble Lord in this House, have any right to desire explanations from Ministers on points which arise and are incidental to their offices, yet, for my own part, as the matter has been pressed pretty forcibly by several of the noble Lords in Opposition, I should be glad to know from the noble Lords in office whether they have specifick assurances from the Courts of Versailles and Madrid sufficient to give them a perfect security that this nation will not be interrupted in the present measures for the purpose of reducing our rebellious subjects in America. I urge this more for the sake of strengthening the hands of Government than for the mere purpose of information; for I am perfectly satisfied that no threats or intrigues whatever should prevent us from reclaiming America from its present disordered state, and securing to us in future its dependance and constitutional submission. But my motive chiefly is, to remind Ministers of what has fallen in the course of this debate, lest their silence may be construed into a positive acquiescence. The noble Earl who spoke last but one [Lord Hillsborough] has exculpated himself very ably from the charge of intentional deceit, imputed to his Circular Letter; but I am far from following that noble Earl in some of the reasoning he resorted to. His Lordship told you that no tax had been since imposed; that if there had, it was not imposed by the same Administration; and that very few, if any, remained in office now, who were in office at the time the letter was written. To me, further than the purpose of mere personal exculpation, all this seems extremely irrelative. I cannot agree that any engagement or promise made by any Administration can be deemed binding on your Lordships. For my part I shall never agree, as a member of this House, to be bound by any such promise. I cannot conceive that it is in the power, nor within the province of any set of Ministers, however able, to compliment away the inherent rights of the British Parliament. It is incompetent to their situation. If the power be in the Parliament, as I am sure it is, they cannot even themselves surrender it, without a manifest breach of trust. I take it to be a right original, co-extensive, and inalienable, not to be parted with or transferred If so, how much less can Parliament and the nation at large be bound by engagements of this nature made by Ministers? I allow that the right of taxation, which is the leading point in dispute, may, from motives of expediency, be suspended or abstained from; but I do contend that it can never bo abandoned entirely, because it is essential to the very nature and exercise of civil Government. The motion now before your Lordships is indeed of a very extraordinary kind: what does it offer? That, after the most notorious acts of violence, after the most patient forbearance on our part, after giving proofs of moderation never before heard of, we are desired to suspend all further operations. Is this consistent with the wisdom and dignity of a great and powerful nation? Consider, my Lords, what a figure you would cut in the eyes of all Europe, in those of your own subjects, in the opinion of even the very people for whose sake the benefit is intended. Would they not all unite in pronouncing it the summit of folly, of cowardice, and national weakness—not