Onflow was a very fingular and a very extraordinary character, a character which it fell to the lot of few men to refemble perfectly. He could not, therefore, thinking as he did upon this head, bring his mind to the idea that it was right, or that Sir Fletcher Norton would think himself obliged to him, if he went fo far as to copy exactly the motion of thanks which ftood upon the Journals, as having been voted to Mr. Onflow. The motion he at first drew up, was pretty nearly to this purpofe; "That the thanks of this House be given to the Right Honourable Sir Fletcher Norton, late fpeaker of this Houfe, for the great dignity, ability, and impartiality, with which he filled the chair, during the two laft Parliaments." This he thought would prove generally acceptable; but on fhewing it to certain perfons, it was not approved; he drew up another, and others difliked that. His wifh was not barely to thank Sir Fletcher Norton in cold language, and without the appearance of cordiality, but to let the motion convey tokens of warmth, of affection, of fincerity. Experience however taught him, that no fuch motion would pafs unobjected to in that Houfe. In order, therefore, to meet unanimity, he had at length been obliged to have recourse to a motion couched in the moft. naked terms, and which was fo far from being likely to challenge objection, that he feared it would not be thought any compliment at all. He added, that the motion fell fo far fhort of his wifhes and his feelings, that he thought it neceffary, in his own defence, to fay thus much of it, le gentlemen fhould imagine that he approved of it, and confidered it as fufficient to the purpose. He then (after referving to himself a right to reply) concluded, with moving "That the thanks of this Houfe be given to the Right Honourable Sir Fletcher Norton, Knight, late fpeaker of this Houfe, for his conduct while he filled the chair of the House during the two laft Parliaments."

Sir William Gordon faid, he never rose in that House but with the utmost embarrassment, and he at that moment felt himself under more than ufual difficulty. If he ventured to oppose the prefent motion, it might be imputed to ill-nature, to perfonal animofity, or to malice, paffions which he trusted had as fmall a fhare in his mind, as in that of any one gentleman living. Laying them now totally afide, as he always fhould do, whenever he troubled the Houfe with his fentiments on any fubject which came under confideration within thofe walls, he muft oppofe the motion, and that for this reafon; in order to be confiftent with himself. He had been one of that majority who, on the first day of the fefsion, voted

P 2

Sir W.

Gorden.

Colonel

Onflorv,

voted that the prefent fpeaker fhould take the chair; he could not, therefore, without glaring inconfiftency, now vote thanks to Sir Fletcher Norton; and he was not a little aftonifhed, that any fuch motion fhould be made. He had taken the trouble to fearch the Journals, upon which not a fingle precedent appeared; that of the thanks of the House having been voted to Mr. Onflow, was exceedingly diffimilar; why then the House fhould now, without any specific reafon affigned, make a new and an extraordinary precedent, he was at a lofs to guefs. The thanks of that House he had ever confidered as the highest honour a subject could bestow; it behoved the House therefore to vote their thanks on none but real and fingularly meritorious occafions. The value of the vote of thanks would decrease, and the honour would no longer continue eftimable, if the vote was lightly refolved

on.

Sir William added, that if the moving the thanks of the House became frequent, he could not help thinking what he remembered to have had faid to him by a foreigner, refpecting the Croix de St. Louis, would be perfectly applicable to fuch a vote: "It is difhonourable not to get it, not very honourable when obtained."

Colonel Onflow faid, he scarcely knew in what words fufficiently to thank the honourable gentleman who made the motion, for the very handfome manner in which he had been pleased to mention a near relation of his, who had formerly filled the chair fo much to his own credit, and to the fatisfaction of thofe who were in his day members of that House If that good man could look down from heaven and obferve what had paffed, he was fure he would be greatly pleased; and if any thing could enhance his fatisfaction, it would be to hear that his eulogium had come from the mouth of a Townshend, Having faid this, the Colonel declared he must nevertheless give his opinion against the motion. Mr. Onflow, while fpeaker, it was true had frequently, when he went up with public money-bills, expreffed, in ftrong conftitutional terms, an earnest wish that the money might be applied to the fervices for which it had been granted, that it might be œconomically expended, and that care might be taken neither to waste it in prodigality, nor to use it in fuch a manner as was not likely to promote either the honour or the profperity of the kingdom. But would any gentleman think that Mr. Onflow would, without the leaft previous authority from the House, when he went up with a bill for the encrease of the civil lift, fay to the King, "Sir, take care how you fpend your own money, lay it out in fuch or fuch a manner!" Was that a

fort

fort of language that gentlemen imagined Mr. Onflow would have held? Mr. Onflow would not have addreffed the throne in that ftile! Mr. Onflow would have thought it an infult to the throne, and an infult to the Commons of Great Britain! Mr. Onflow would have confidered it as queftioning the liberality of the Houfe of Commons, as difgracefully reflecting on their generofity. The Commons of England, the colonel faid, was a great gentleman. The whole conduct of the Commons of England ought to be manly, noble, and generous. Every one of their acts fhould be upon a large fcale, and their language fhould never favour of meannefs nor diftruft. With regard to the precedent of the thanks of the House having been voted to Mr. Onflow, the precedent was by no means in point. By that precedent, who did it appear had voted the thanks of the Houfe to Mr. Onflow?a living Parliament! Was that the cafe now?-The direct contrary. Mr. Onflow had been thanked by the House, and his Majefty had been addreffed to make fome provifion for I his family. Sir Fletcher Norton had taken care of the latter, before he took the chair. The colonel faid farther that as to the motion, he for one should neither vote for it, nor againft it; he did not think it became him to vote against his colleague, whatever his opinion might be of his conduct, nor was he inclined to do any thing difagreeable to any part of his conftitutents, let that part be ever fo fmall.

Mr. Roberts began with foliciting the goodness of the Mr.Roberts. House, to excufe the rough manner in which a member fo inexperienced as he was, might poffibly exprefs himself. He then said, that he had voted for the difplacing Sir Fletcher Norton on the first day of the feffion, and that he conceived the majority of that day could not with the leaft confiftency vote for the prefent motion. He therefore, as one of that majority, rofe, to fay, that he fhould vote against the ques tion. It was not poffible for him as a young member, to know what had been the merits of Sir Fletcher Norton, while he fat in the chair; having feen no fpeaker there but the prefent, how could he agree to thank the late fpeaker for his conduct? On the first day of the feffion, a right honourable gentleman had declared in ftrong and clear language, that Sir Fletcher Norton had made a fpeech to the throne, which was both ill-timed and improper. Not having heard any good arguments urged in contradiction of that affertion, he had given it credit, and for that reafon had voted against Sir Fletcher's taking the chair again. The decifion of that day

convinced

Lord Duncannon.

Sir Francis
Buffet.

convinced him, that he had adopted the right opinion, and as Sir Fletcher Norton was then oufted, he was a little furprized to hear any gentleman rife and move, that the thanks of the Houfe be voted to Sir Fletcher Norton. He could not reconcile the vote of the firft day, with the propofition now moved, and therefore he should vote against the latter. Lord Duncannon declared, that although he had not fat in the laft Parliament, he had heard of that fpeech, to which allufion had been made by the right honourable gentleman who made the motion, and by the two laft fpeakers. That the fpeech met with his full approbation; he thought it did great credit to the late fpeaker, whofe conduct on that and other occafions merited the warmest thanks of the Houfe; he therefore fhould vote for the motion.

Sir Francis Baffet faid it was impoffible for him, as a young member, to be competent to decide on the propriety of the prefent motion; he could not, therefore, make himself refponfible for it, by voting in its fupport. If Sir Fletcher Norton merited the thanks of that Houfe, he should have imagined the laft Parliament, who had witneffed Sir Fletcher's conduct, would have voted them. The laft Parliament had not done this, and from the vote of the first day, he could not fufpect that the prefent Parliament had any inclination to adopt fuch a propofition, as was now before the House. He declared he had the honour to vote with the majority on the first day of the feffion, because he was inclined, from the argument of that day's debate, to think, it was a wife meafure to chufe a new speaker. Not having fat in the former Parliament, it was impoffible for him to form an opinion, from his own knowledge, of the late fpeaker's conduct. understood 170 members of that Houfe were in the fame predicament with himself; they could not be judges of Sir Fletcher Norton's conduct any more than he could, and therefore he thought it would neither be warrantable for them nor him to vote for the prefent motion.

He

Mr. Steele. Mr. Steele faid the obvious reafon, why the laft Parlia ment had not come to a vote like that now proposed, was, on account of the sudden diffolution of that Parliament. He declared, that an end was put to the existence of the laft Parliament; altogether unexpectedly. That there were gentlemen prefent, who were in camp with him at the time, who faw the foldiers moving off to their respective feats of freedom, in exercise of the right given them by the act of Parliament, at their own will, to the great irregularity of military

military discipline; even their general not having power to reftrain them. Having noticed this inconveniency, Mr. Steele faid he did not merely take up the matter, as the hon. baronet who spoke laft did, on the opinion of others; that although he had not been in the late Parliament, he had heard of the conduct of the late fpeaker, and it had met with his hearty approbation. The celebrated fpeech made by Sir Fletcher Norton had been printed by order of the Houfe, and was matter of public notoriety. That fpeech he approved, and he believed every man, who had the dignity of the Commons of England at heart, approved of it likewife. He concluded with declaring that he fhould vote for the queftion.

General Smith fupported the motion, and entered into a General defence of the fpeech made by the late fpeaker at the bar of Smith. the House of Lords, arguing upon the ftrict propriety of his admonishing his Majefty to difpofe of the large fum the Commons had voted for the fupport of his civil lift, The General alfo, as a juft tribute of praife to Sir Fletcher Norton, ftated to the Houfe the great civility he had, on a former occafion, experienced at his hands, in the course of a tranfaction which had given them no small trouble.

Mr. Courtenaye oppofed the motion, and faid he muft firft Mr. Courte take notice of the little fhare of argument produced in its naye. fupport, which could, or ought to weigh with him and the other young members. The right honourable gentleınan who moved it, he observed, had drawn up the motion in general terms; he had nevertheless exprefsly declared, that he did not reft it on the fpeech at the bar of another Houfe, which had fo frequently been adverted to in the course of the debate. He, for one, was free to fay, that he was very far from approving of that fpeech; how then was he to reconcile himfelf to a motion, of a general tendency, which of course comprehended that part of the laft fpeaker's conduct, as well as every other? There was no exception in the words of the motion, though the right honourable mover had taken fuch pains to except to it in his introductory argument. In his opinion there was in Sir Fletcher Norton's fpeech to the throne, fomething altogether unwarrantable. He knew not where to look for an example, unlefs he referred to city politics. In the records of London, it was to be found that a Lord Mayor, taking advantage of his official capacity, which brought him into the prefence of his Sovereign, had dared, with all the infolent gravity of magiftracy, to address

his