Mr. Sheridan admitted that the mode of appointing committees by ballot was a good one at first, but it was now become one of those good rules, and good practices, which are so often converted into masks of imposture and abuse. The right hon. gentleman affected to treat a public canvass for a committee as absurd and indecent. But he might have recollected, that he himself had recourse to that absurd and indecent mode of appointing a committee at a very critical period (the time of the regency). He would now ask him why, at that time, he gave into such absurdity, and induced the house to act in a manner so unbecoming its dignity? It was because at that time he knew the case to be delicate and nice, and that the country would not have been satisfied with a balloted committee, which they knew to be a jury packed by ministers, to serve the purposes which they had in view. The right hon. gentleman asked why they could object to a committee whose names they did not know? What would the right hon. gentleman say, if he should assert that their names were known, and that several members who had treasury lists put into their hands at the door of the house, went away in disgust? He could not be permitted, by the forms of the house, positively to say who would be on the list of the committee, but he should merely mention who, in his opinion, would be proper persons, and whose names, he would venture to predict, would appear on the list to be given in the course of an hour. If, however, that list agreed with his prediction, he presumed it would hardly be contended that he was such a prophet as to be able to tell the chances of a fair ballot. The names were very respectable, and it was necessary that they should be so, in order to give a colour to the business. Mr. Sheridan then read the names on his list as follows:

:

Sir John Scott, a very respectable name.

Isaac Hawkins Browne, Esq., a very proper person.

Charles Bragge, Esq.; he will entertain the committee with critical remarks.

William Hussey, Esq.

W. Wilberforce Bird, Esq.

William Plumer, Esq.

Thomas Powys, Esq.

John Blackburne, Esq.

Thomas Berney Bramston, Esq.

All very respectable gentlemen!

He must observe, however, that in this list ministers have not preserved the rules of proportion, for his side of the house were entitled to have five and a fraction. He did not charge the chancellor of the exchequer with making out the list himself. Here, said Mr. Sheridan, I see the right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Dundas) smile, as if he would say, "No, my right hon. friend, in the innocence of his heart, never suspected such a thing; but there are plenty around perfectly competent to the task." With respect to the question itself, he was perfectly indifferent whether an inquiry was instituted or not, if another committee was not appointed. An hon. general had endeavoured to account for the secretary at war not signing the order of council; he believed that it proceeded from the reflections it contained against the alarmists; for he was so rooted an alarmist himself, that he was sure he could not believe that any of his tribe could act in a manner worthy of reprehension. He begged pardon of the house for being jocular on so grave a subject; but, even amidst the wreck of public credit, and on the brink of the country's ruin, it was impossible not to laugh at the juggling tricks and miserable shifts to which ministers had recourse to screen themselves from punishment.

The house divided-for the motion 67; against it 141.

Mr. Sheridan then moved-"That Mr. Fox be added to the committeee on the affairs of the bank, &c."

The house divided—ayes 53; noes 144.

MARCH 3.

STOPPAGE OF CASH PAYMENTS AT THE BANK.

A clause was brought up by Mr. Bird, which he was desirous should be inserted in the bill, viz.-" That if any person should fail in the payment of a note three days after it became due, that it should be lawful for the justices to summon him before them, to award costs to the plaintiff, with the payment of the

amount of the note, and to levy distress upon the effects of the person so failing in his engagement."

MR. SHERIDAN stated, this was as important a subject as could possibly engage the attention of the house in the present unfortunate situation of the country. One unfortunate consequence would follow from the issue of those bills, that if any should not be paid, a general distrust would take place with respect to their validity, and the whole would undergo a most alarming depreciation. At the same time it would be a most unfortunate thing to hold out to all the manufacturers in the kingdom, a menace of being imprisoned or sent to the house of correction, if, not from any fraudulent purpose, but from the failure of remittances or the pressure of the times, they should be unable to make good their engagement. If the bill was accompanied with such a menace, instead of having the effect to afford a temporary relief to their credit, it would tempt them rather to incur the evils of immediate bankruptcy, than run the risk of being subjected to a punishment so painful and degrading At the same time, if these bills were to rest merely on nominal credit, they would not answer the purpose to afford relief to the laborious poor. If presented to the baker and butcher, they would not be accepted by them to their full amount, and this circumstance must also tend to create a general depreciation. He should therefore, propose, in order to remedy this evil, that the persons issuing those notes, as a security for their payment, should previously deposit property adequate to the amount of the notes issued, and that no individuals should be allowed to issue those notes, whose substance did not allow them to make this deposit. This precaution, he remarked, would remove every chance for fraud or depreciation, which must otherwise inevitably take place in the circulation of this paper. If manufacturers were in such a situation as to justify them in issuing those notes, they must either be on such a footing of credit with their banker, or in possession of good bills, which would enable them to produce security to the amount of the notes issued. He illustrated his proposition by referring to the instance of lottery tickets. The dealers in those tickets were allowed to divide them in small shares for the accommodation of their customers, after having deposited the original tickets as a security. He then gave notice of his intention to move that evening for an immediate supply of copper coinage,

in pennies and two-pennies, for the relief of the laborious poor. He should not move for any fresh coinage of halfpence, as, if these were of the proper standard, they must tend to cut out all those which were now in circulation; an evil which might be of greater magnitude than the relief it was intended to afford. He could not confide for a moment in the diligence of ministers; else, when they foresaw, as they must necessarily have done, the approach of this great public calamity, they would have taken measures to have had by this time waggon-loads of this useful coin coming up from Bolton's manufactory at Birmingham.

The clause, after some further discussion, went through the committee, in which a penalty that a magistrate might inflict was limited to the sum of twenty shillings: and being reported, it was added to the bill by way of rider.

Mr. Sheridan then moved, "That an humble address be presented to his Majesty, that he will be graciously pleased to give directions that measures may be taken for procuring an immediate supply of such copper coinage as may be best adapted to the payment of the laborious poor in the present exigency."

Ordered.

THANKS TO ADMIRAL SIR JOHN JERVIS.

Mr. Dundas moved, "That the thanks of this house be given to Admiral Sir John Jervis, Knight of the most honourable order of the Bath, for his able and gallant conduct in the most brilliant and decisive victory obtained over the Spanish fleet, on the 14th day of February last, by the fleet under his command."

Mr. Keene did not consider this motion sufficient, and, therefore, moved in addition to it, “ That an humble address be presented to his Majesty, that his Majesty would be graciously pleased to confer some signal mark of his royal favour on Admiral Sir John Jervis, for his gallant and meritorious exertions on the 14th of February," &c.

Mr. Sheridan said, it is impossible but that every man must feel the sentiment that everything that can be done by this house, ought to be done in the present instance to express our high sense of the distinguished merit and eminent services of the gallant admiral. I differ, however, from the hon. mover of the resolution, who has stated, that for the sake of Sir John Jervis, he is, at all events, desirous that it should appear on the journals of this house. If the motion be put and opposed, to insert it on the journals of this house, instead of adding to the well-earned reputation of that brave officer, would, I conceive, have a contrary effect. The journals of this house do not contain the records of

that brave officer's glory. They would only bear testimony to the rejection of the motion. I cannot, however, submit to the doctrine, that this house have no right to interfere to express their marked approbation of a distinguished character, or to apply to his Majesty to signalize the most eminent public services by a peculiar mark of his royal favour. If there was any chance that the present motion would be passed unanimously, it would experience my warmest approbation. I cannot allow the proud boast of the right hon. gentleman to pass unnoticed, that in no instance has there appeared on the part of the executive government any degree of insensibility to the worth of gallant officers, or any want of promptitude to reward the claims of public services. The very mention of the name of the hon. admiral must forcibly recal the recollection of his former services, and the degree of attention which they experienced from the executive government. No mark of honour-no testimony of reward has hitherto followed from his gallant exertions, which ministers feel themselves compelled to notice in terms of the highest panegyric. While they have withheld from him and other illustrious characters, the just reward of their merit, on whom have they chosen to throw away their honours? On persons who have no pretensions to professional desert, who can exhibit no claims of public service. The late instances of individuals, on whom, for no reason whatever that could justify any addition of dignity in the eyes of the nation, the distinction of the peerage has been conferred, undoubtedly tend to cheapen the honour, and to take away from it all idea of reward for public services. If any honour could be conferred on the gallant admiral, in a way so marked as to separate it from the mass of honours which have been lavished on others, it would, undoubtedly, only be a just tribute for his distinguished services. I conceive that I am fully borne out by facts, when I aver, that honours have not lately been conferred in a manner agreeable to the public voice or the public wishes. I need only allude to the instance of a noble lord (Howe) who, by his gallant and able conduct had formed the strongest claims upon the gratitude and justice of his country. A blue riband was then vacant. It was pointed out for the noble lord by public expectation and public rumour. The noble lord could certainly feel no desire for such a distinction from any motive of personal vanity but it was natural he should wish, for