that if the whole truth were laid before us, this House and the publick would be less sanguine in the prosecution of the American war? I remember the day when the noble Lord told us, that others were more sanguine and impatient than himself. What are we to think of this inconsistence, that he should suffer himself to be driven to every sanguinary measure, contrary to his own better judgment? He professes the most earnest desire for peace, but submits to and supports every measure and principle of the most sanguinary kind. In the very beginning of this session he exclaimed with the most apparent earnestness and sincerity, would to God that all things were as they were in 1763 ! He expressly declared his readiness to dispense with taxation; he has even proposed terms with America, (such as they are,) which at least proves that he does not maintain the doctrine of unconditional submission; the next day, perhaps, he is taken to task, and insulted publickly before us all, for his indolence and inactivity; then again he resumes his taxation and compulsory revenue. He submits to be the mere instrument of carrying through this House every merciless and vindictive act that is suggested to him; and very placidly acquiesces with the noble Lord lately advanced to the head of the American Department, who declares, in the most peremptory tone, that he will reduce America to unconditional submission with fire and sword.

The place of First Lord of the Treasury has usually been considered as the post of Minister; but whether it be from indolence or indisposition to the service, we know not; certain, however, it is, that the present noble Lord in that office suffers himself to be controlled and superseded, at least in American measures. A Secretary of State for the American Department is introduced to give vigour to sanguinary measures, to counteract the more pacifick disposition of the apparent Minister, lest the House should catch the relenting mood, which in truth they appear very well disposed to, whenever the noble Lord at the head of the Treasury gives the least opening. These are the dispositions which all his friends (and I myself am not without my partialities to him) wish to see confirmed into steady and persevering principles of action. Why will he not justify the favourable opinion of his friends, by a manly adherence to the line of lenient justice? If these principles are not merely transitory and complexional in him, let him confirm them by his actions. If he will take a decided part now, according to his professions, and not suffer himself to be overruled by some secret and destructive influence, he may give peace to his country and to America. It is an important moment, that does not fall to every man’s lot. A manly steadiness, and exertion of that influence which he possesses, may rescue his country from all the horrours of a civil war; and when I have said thus much to him, his own reflection will suggest to him, that the man who has so much in his power, and neglects the exertion, either through indolence or any private or personal views, will have a very heavy load of guilt lying at his door.

However, sir, for the present, and with respect to the materials which I have now offered to the House, I shall confine my address to the noble Lord as Chancellor of the Exchequer, distinct from the efficient and responsible Minister of the American war; a distinction which perhaps he may not be displeased with at present, and which he may find it very material to be able hereafter to justify.

I now submit myself to the noble Lord’s comment and correction, if I have fallen into any material error in my calculations; if not, I will, under favour of the House, reserve myself for a few words upon the general subject of the American civil war, which it is the sole and ultimate object of all my prayers and labours to avert.

Lord North said, the honourable gentleman looked for impossibilities; he could not divine what the expense of the campaign would amount to. It was impossible to tell, till the expense was incurred; and in some instances not till long after. Such accounts as were brought into the respective offices, were regularly laid before the House and that was all that could be done. He was against the motion, because it could not be complied with; the sums might be right, but the House had no documents before them to come to such a vote.

Hon. James Luttrell supported Mr. Hartley’s motion; but many of his arguments went to prove, that the information required by Mr. Hartley would be very insufficient, if Parliament were to be imposed upon by such mutilated and garbled estimates as were then laid upon the table, tending to mislead, rather than inform the House; that though they were so very artfully and intricately drawn up that it would be found difficult to decypher them, it was indeed unnecessary to attempt it; for he would undertake to prove that they were replete with fraud and imposition, the money not having appeared to be applied to the several purposes for which Parliament had granted it; that the practice was to raise money upon false pretences; that Parliament had voted sixty thousand pounds for the express purposes of repairing two seventy-four-gun ships and one frigate, not a shilling of which money had been so expended, the two large ships being decayed for want of repair, and the frigate broken up as soon as the money was asked for. He then proved several other impositions not less gross; but contended, that the large supplies granted annually by Parliament were sufficient, with good management, to answer all the necessary expenses of the Navy. He showed that, either by ignorance or fraud, a great and heavy debt was incurred; but said he was sure that the House was not before acquainted with the means by which that debt was contracted, and was persuaded Government could only trust to the indolence of Parliament, and the insufficiency of the estimates, to shelter themselves from that resentment such impositions on the publick and insult on the Commons merited. He then stated that more than half a million of money had been voted for naval stores since 1771, exclusive of half the four pounds per man for each month, which is a very great supply towards the wear and tear; that several articles in the ordinary estimates have increased nearly double in the space of a few years; that naval stores supplied by America before the war, had of late years fallen one-third in their price; that harbour moorings now stand Government in £50,000 a year, which a few years ago did not exceed £20,000, though they are not so frequently shifted, nor attended with the same expense as formerly; that £400,000 had been granted annually towards the repairs of our fleet, which is more than double the sum voted the year after the war, though new ships had replaced many of the old ones; and the service our Navy had been employed in during the peace could not occasion the necessity of frequent repairs. He then stated many more supplies, such as £264,795 for improving the £400,000 towards paying off the Navy debt, &c.; but which way all these sums had really been applied, he contended, could not be traced cut by means of the estimates, or other accounts laid before Parliament; certain it was, however, that the Navy debt (reckoning the £400,000 granted by Parliament) from the 31st of December, 1771, to the 31st of December, 1775, had increased from £1,179,375 12s. ll½d. to £3,098,579 0s. ¾d. He then took many exceptions to several articles in the Navy estimate laid before Parliament, such as the number of seamen charged more than had been voted, a mutilated account of £20,096 12s. 2d., as the whole expense that appeared for building King’s ships in contractors’ yards, when £17,574 granted, for the same purpose, had been smuggled into another estimate the same year; that no less than £91,524 9s. l0d. was not to be accounted for by the ingenuity of office, but by a supposition of the Navy Boards, that there might be more provisions on board the ships than last year, and that the price was higher. He concluded by insisting, that the charge of £96,291 5s. 5d. for victualling land forces, ought not to have been included in the Navy debt; and in support of this assertion, as wall as to point out the necessity of a strict Parliamentary inquiry into the many impositions he had alluded to, and the remedy necessary to be applied, he desired that the Clerk might read an Address from the Commons to the Crown, on Thursday, May 31, 1711, in which they set forth, that it is their privilege to adjust the proportion of the money they grant, or are, for the sake of publick credit, bound to pay; that when the sums are stated and granted, those through whose hands the disposition of them passes, are not to be allowed in any shape to alter or enlarge them; that when uses are found out, such as were neither voted nor addressed for, it is a misapplication pf the publick money; the Commons set forth the abuse of diverting several sums issued for one service, and transferring them to other purposes, for which they were not intended; and that such practices amount to attempts, which differ very little from levying money without the consent of Parliament at all.