his Majesty's message to the house, had expressed a hope that we should still be able to accommodate the matters in question between the courts of Madrid and Great Britain, without being driven to the necessity of going to war; a hope in which they must all most cordially concur. But although it was right to follow up their address to his Majesty of last week with a vote of supply, and not leave the address as a mere matter of profession, Mr. Sheridan said, he wished to know if, in the event of war being commenced, the right hon. gentleman would find it necessary to have a committee of supply again?

The two resolutions passed.

LOAN TO THE EAST-INDIA COMPANY.

Mr. Sheridan, adverting to the loan of exchequer bills for £300,000 to the East-India Company, remarked, that possibly the right hon. gentleman might have been otherwise employed for the last two or three days, than to have had an opportunity of attending to the subject; if not, he should be glad to know how the right hon. gentleman found the matter upon inquiry.

Mr. Pitt answered, that he really had not had an opportunity of attending to the circumstance; but if the right hon. gentleman conceived that there was anything in it on which he ought to make a motion, the most. regular way would be to submit one on the subject.

Mr. Sheridan said, that he would submit one on the subject on the ensuing Friday.

MAY 11.

POST-HORSE DUTY BILL.

The order for the third reading of this bill being read,

MR. SHERIDAN again moved his clause to oblige the farmers of the duty to declare upon oath the annual produce of their respective districts. Without some clause to this effect, the public, he contended, could not reap the full advantage of the bill, because the produce of the several districts being known only to those who farmed them, no advance could be expected on the price at which they were first let. The farmers were to be considered in the light of public accountants, and might fairly be called on to give an account of money collected from the public.

Mr. I. H. Browne contended, that it was impossible to call upon men to declare on oath what they had a strong temptation to conceal, more especially under circumstances which rendered it extremely difficult to discover whether they had declared the truth or not, so as to found an indictment for perjury. He could not consider the farmers in the light of public accountants, nor agree to an inquisition into private property. And, finally, would not bid high for that of which they were obliged to give an account upon oath.

Mr. Sheridan said, the bill empowered the farmers to call upon all persons engaged in letting post-horses to answer on oath, who had a very great temptation in the way of interest to swear falsely. If the hon. gentleman's objection went merely to a wanton use of oaths, he ought to object to the bill entirely. The farmers must, necessarily, be considered as public accountants. The oath proposed was, at least, a safer oath than any other authorized by the bill; and without it, or something equivalent to it, the public would not reap the full benefit of the bill. The question was put, and the clause rejected without a division.

TRADE TO NOOTKA SOUND.

Mr. Sheridan said that he had a motion to make, which he knew not whether he had worded properly; but the purport of it was, to obtain information whether the trade to Nootka Sound, and the settlement forming, or intended to be formed there, was undertaken under the sanction and authority of government, or merely as an enterprize of private persons.

Mr. Pitt wished the motion to be postponed till the information promised in his Majesty's answer to the address could be laid before the house. Licences to trade to Nootka Sound had been granted; and he knew of no authority for that or any other purpose but such as those licences contained.

Mr. Sheridan remarked, that what the house had now heard, that the settlement was a private enterprize, was very material.

Mr. Pitt contended, that whether the settlement was or was not a private enterprize, there could be no doubt that it was incumbent on the honour of the country to demand satisfaction for any insult or injury offered to its subjects, whether in their private capacity of traders, or acting under the more immediate sunction of government.

Mr. Sheridan declared, that if the right hon. gentleman meant to insinuate, that he did not think the country bound in honour to protect every subject from insult or injury, he had put a construction on the words which they would not bear.

The motion was postponed.

MR. HASTINGS'S TRIAL.

Mr. Burke called the attention of the house to a motion he had to offer upon the subject of the protracted continuance of the trial. After some observations upon the petition presented by Mr. Hastings to the house of lords, he adverted to what he conceived to be the principal causes of its not having been brought to a speedier conclusion; the first was the determination of the house of lords, obtained at the instance of Mr. Hastings, to proceed upon all the articles of charge before they came to any discussion; another was, that the counsel for Mr. Hastings had insisted upon reading papers at large, instead of extracts; but what occasioned, perhaps, the greatest delay was, that the managers were not made acquainted with the grounds and extent of the principles on which the decisions of the house of lords were made respecting the admissibility of evidence. This made it impossible for them to know how far the next questions which they intended to put might, or might not, militate against those principles. He concluded by moving the following resolution :—“ That the house taking into consideration the interruptions occasioned by the occupations of the judges and the house of lords; as also the impediments which have occurred, or may occur in the course of the trial of the impeachment of Warren Hastings, Esq., doth, without meaning to abandon the truth or importance of the charges, authorise the managers of their said impeachment to insist only upon such, and so many of the said charges as shall appear to them the most conducive to obtaining speedy and effectual justice against the said Warren Hastings."-Second, "that the commons of Great Britain in parliament assembled, from a regard to their own honour, and from a duty which they owe to all the commons of Great Britain, in whose name, as well as in their own, they act in the public prosecutions by them carried on before the house of lords, are bound to persevere in their impeachment against Warren Hastings, late governor-general of Bengal, until judgment may be obtained upon the most important articles in the same."

Mr. Pitt did not oppose the motion.

The master of the rolls thought it would be more advisable to make the motion general, and to follow that precisely which had been adopted in the case of Lord Macclesfield. He read a copy of that motion, and though he confessed it was not 80 ably worded as the right hon. gentleman's, yet he conceived it preferable, as there was no occasion to assign a reason, the doing of which would be liable to comment.

Mr. Sheridan contended, that the difference of the circumstances of the two impeachments made the distinction between the two motions sufficiently clear. In the impeachment of the Earl of Mansfield, the managers were armed with the authority in question, in the first instance; it was therefore unnecessary to assign a reason. The hon. and learned gentleman should observe, that in the present impeachment, they had now passed almost three years without obtaining their object. On which special account it was necessary to assign a reason for giving fresh au

thorities to the managers. Nor did his right hon. friend's motion appear to him in any part of it objectionable; it conveyed no insinuation; for surely it was no insinuation to state that the judges were obliged, in discharge of their official duty, to leave town, and do the business of their several circuits.

The house divided: ayes 48; noes 31.

MAY 14.

EXCHEQUER BILLS LENT TO THE EAST-INDIA COMPANY.

MR. SHERIDAN, adverting to the exchequer bills lent to the East-India Company, remarked that he should take up but a short time of the house in the discussion of a subject rather of a dry nature, but which nevertheless would afford some information, and was indeed very interesting to those who duly considered the importance of preserving the national credit. New events had lately made other matters give place, and those new events had produced new doctrines which, in the eyes of some, might render his motion objectionable. He declared, however, that he was not one of those who, in the first moment of a probability of hostilities, thought the minister entitled to that unlimited confidence which they had lately heard so much of, as well as that an inquisitive house of commons was the worst enemy the country could have. Neither did he think that, at such a moment, every thing of a nature distinct from the important topic which rendered military preparations necessary, was to give way, and that they were to take it for granted the minister had so much upon his hands that he ought not to be expected to listen to any other business whatsoever. There were matters certainly, which, though unconnected with the subject that had so much engaged the public attention within the last ten days, were very essential objects of consideration, and well worthy the attention of that house. That which he intended to bring forward was one of them. It was impossible to mention the matter without recurring to what he had so often complained of-to the mode of temporizing which the right hon. gentleman had adopted ever since 1786, instead of fairly stating to the public what the real situation of their finances was, that system of concealment for the sake of making the public believe their affairs were better than they really were, and then having recourse to expedients from time to

time, to enable the business of government to be carried on. That this appeared to be the system pursued (Mr. Sheridan said) was an opinion which he would still maintain, notwithstanding the use that might be made of it, and the clamour that might be raised against all who thought as he did, and who might be represented to the public as holding language dangerous and depreciating. It might be said that when it ought to be the common interest of all to raise the spirits of the people, by representing their affairs in the best light, they were running them down to the disadvantage of the public, and the encouragement of our enemies. None of those imputations, Mr. Sheridan declared, would ever make him shrink from what he thought his duty. Be it peace, or be it war, he would continue to state things as they really were, not having a doubt upon his mind but that by so doing, by publishing to that house, to the people at large, and consequently to the whole world, our real situation, we should be best enabled to extricate ourselves out of any difficulty or embarrassment which might arise, and best secure the national safety. Concealment might serve a temporary purpose, but in the end the consequence must prove mischievous in the extreme. If parliament were not to look into the state of their affairs from time to time, they had better, instead of voting a million, rely at once on the minister for the business of parliament, let him make war, conduct it just as he thought fit, grant him whatever he asked for, and when it was ended, let him say he would settle the accounts when it suited him, and in the manner he liked best. Mr. Sheridan at length proceeded to the main object of his motion, and desired that the clause of the act of 1783, which contained the condition of the public's paying off the exchequer bills, if not paid by the East India Company by the 5th of April, 1786, might be read. This being read, he observed, that he had agreed entirely with the hon. baronet (Sir Grey Cooper) behind him, who had first drawn his attention to the subject, and whose observations were at all times well worthy attention, that in suffering those exchequer bills to remain unpaid to this day, government had acted directly contrary to law. He mentioned the two sums of £300,000 and £200,000 paid into the exchequer in the year 1789 and 1790, by the East India Company, on account of demands made on them by government, but not acknowledged by themselves, and contended, that out of