72] 
to the regulations enacted by the 
legislature, in order to preserve to 
itself the power over the national 
purse, against the attempts of minis- 
ters to dispose of the nation’s mo- 
ney at their own discretion. On 
these various premises Mr. Grey 
founded no less than fifteen resolu- 
tions, the last of which summing up 
the purport of the whole, stated, 
‘¢ that, in the instances mentioned, 
the king’s ministers had been guilty 
of presenting false accounts, calcu- 
lated to mislead the judement of 
the house, ofa flagrant violation of 
various acts of parliament, and ofa 
gross misapplication of the public 
money.” 
The reply, made by Mr. Pitt, 
stated, that though ministers were 
bound faithfully to appropriate the: 
public money to the purposes spe- 
cified, yet there were a multiplicity 
of cases wherein that rule could not 
strictly be observed. Services of 
the most critical importance, and 
the most imperious necessity, often 
compelled them to deviate from the 
letter of the act of appropriation : 
but was that, or was any other act, to 
stand in the way of material services 
due to the nation by those who were 
entrusted with its safety and pre- 
servation? These deviations were 
founded on wise precedents, and 
sanctioned as just, by long and re- 
peated experience. Extraordinaries 
were the inevitable: attendants of 
war, especially such an one as the 
present, which requiring unprece- 
dented exertions, justified «unpre- 
cedented methods of cuiducting it. 
Mr. Pitt adduced a number of facts 
to prove that he had acted conform. 
ably to the practice authorised in 
former wars. The very act of ap- 
propriation, he said, evinced the 
propriety of extraordinaries, by 
ANNUAL REGISTER, 1796. 
making good several millions ex« 
pended under that head: and no 
objection was ever made to the 
principle itself. He vindicated, 
with great acuteness, the different 
parts of his conduct in the admini- 
stration of the finances, and argued 
with great ability against the defects 
and misconduct imputed to him. 
The speech of Mr. Pitt was an- 
swered by Mr. Fox, who enforced 
and enlarged upon the arguments — 
that had been urged by Mr. Grey. 
Mr. Steele replied in justification of 
Mr. Pitt’s maxims and measures 
and closed the debate by moving 
the previous question, which was 
carried by two hundred and nine.to 
thirty-eight. 
The tenth of May was remark- 
able for a motion made in each 
house against the continuation of 
the war, and for offering terms of 
peace. That in the house of lords 
was made by the earl of Guildford ; 
that in the house of commons by 
Mr. Fox. The same arguments, 
with little variation, were used by 
both speakers, that had so often 
been urged in the preceding at- 
tempts of this nature, and met of 
course with much the same answers, 
The only matter of novelty was, the 
construction put on Mr. Wickbam’s 
commission, to inform Mr. Barthe- 
lemy, the French minister at Basle, 
of the disposition on the part of this 
country, to enter into a negociation 
for peace, and that minister’s reply 
to the British agent. Opposition 
treated the application of the 
former as far from calculated to 
conciliate the French, while mini- 
stry asserted that it was fully suf- 
ficent to induce them to treat, 
had they been sincerely disposed to 
meet us on equitable terms. ‘This 
particular constituted the principal 
- ebjecy 
