HISTORY OF EUROPE. 
nisters liad acceded to his desire for 
# separate peace. 
Mr. Pitt asserted, that lately the 
king of Sardinia, in circumstances 
of great difficulty, had consented to 
# suspension of arms with the 
French, provided it were in con- 
junction with the emperor, but on 
no other terms: the emperor not 
consenting, the armistice did not 
take place. The French bad, in the 
mean time, offered him peace, if he 
would make a cession of their ac- 
quisitions in his country, ard an al- 
liance with them, but he had re- 
fused their offers. 
It was observed, by Mr. Francis, 
that the motives of action with that 
prince would originate in the pres- 
sures he was in. His situation re- 
quired him to consult the necessity 
of his affairs, rather than the mag- 
nanimity of his d sposition ; exclu 
sively of which, history had long 
shewn, that no dependance could 
be placed on the stability of the 
princes of the house of Savoy. Mr. 
Pitt however being farther pressed 
upon this subject, put an end to it 
by declining to reply. 
Three days after. this discussion 
Mr. Grey brought several heavy 
charges against ministers, and moved 
them to be sufficient grounds of 
impeachment. They had, he said, 
violated the act of appropriation, the 
main pillar of the pecuniary privi- 
Jeges of parliament, by diverting 
the grants of money to other pur- 
poses than those for which they 
were voted, and they had endea- 
Youred to screen themselves by spu- 
rious accounts. He then detailed 
the particulars in proof of his ac- 
cusation; adding, that if the neces« 
sities of the times had compelled 
them to have recourse to such me- 
thods for procuring money, they 
[71 
ought, without disguising the fact; 
to have applied to parliament for 
indemnity. The house of commons 
had, he said, been notoriously faulty 
in not setting limits to the extraors 
diftaries during the American war; 
and the committee appointed to 
examine and digest the public ac- 
counts had particularly pointed out 
the ruinous consequences of such 
negligence. Mr. Pitt had censured 
it himself with peculiar severity, 
but had nevertheless been more 
guilty than any of his predecessors 
in the ministry. So determined 
was the house to put a stop to these 
infractions of its rights, thatit passed, 
in 1784, a resolution that should 
parliament be dissolved before the 
act of appropriation had passed, to 
misapply the money granted should 
be reputed a high misdemeanour. 
An act had also been passed under 
the present minister, to obviate the 
bad consequences of balances re- 
Miaining with the paymaster-gene- 
ral, and to provide for the constant 
pay of the army; but this act had 
been notoriously infringed ; the pay- 
master having actually in his hands 
a balance of eighty-three thousand 
pounds. Mr. Grey, after mentions 
ing other instances of misapplicas 
tion, adverted to the disposition- 
paper, a species of voucher first 
used in the prodigal reign of Charles 
Il. and established at the revolution, 
as an autbentic document, toinform 
parliament in what manner the sup- 
plies they had granted had been 
expended. Thispaper he considered 
as a mere deception; ils contents 
represented the sums voted by) par- 
liament, as issued and applied con- 
formably to its intent, which was 
contrary to, truths This he might 
be told was only a form; but the 
practice wasin fact directly opposite 
[F +] to 
