HISTORY OF EUROPE. 
Bic merits of the measure then in 
discussion, but by a fixed purpose 
of not betraying, by their con- 
duct, that fundamental maxim of 
the constitution, that the ministers 
who are responsible for the measures 
of government, otight to have the 
guidance and direction of them, ac- 
cording to their own sense of fitness 
and expediency. The indirect me- 
thods said to be in agitation for 
their removal, were iil-calculated 
to bring about any compromise of 
‘opinions, and tended rather to con. 
firm them in the resolution of meet. 
ing the danger manfully, and should 
they be turned out for want of com- 
pliance with the court,of meriting at 
least the confidence of the people. 
We shall now return to the par- 
liamentary history of these proceed- 
ings. On the 30th of Maya divi- 
sion took place in the committee of 
‘the house on the mutiny bill, on a 
motion for bringing up the clause es- 
fablishing limited service; for the 
clause 254: against it 125; majo- 
rity 129. The ministers wished 
to have the clause read a second 
time the same night, but after the 
house had been made to divide seven 
times in order to prevent it, they 
were compelled to give up the 
point. On the 2nd. of June the 
debate was renewed on the mo- 
tion to fill up the blanks in the 
clause, and a division being called 
for, there were for the question 
2065; against it 105; majority 
101, Far from being disheartened 
“by these repeated discomfitures, the 
Opposition resolved on making one 
‘effort more before the clause finally 
Passed the house of commons. On 
‘the third reading of the bill (June 6) 
Mr. S. Bourne moved an amend- 
ment, the effect of which was to 
substitute service during war and 
fey 
4 
ot 
for six months afterwards, instead 
of service for a definite period of 
years. The house divided, and there 
appeared, for the amendment 103 ; 
against it 195 ; majority 92. 
After the first reading of the mu- 
tiny bill in the house of lords, amo- 
tion was made by lord Hawkesbury 
(June 10) for the production of the 
military opinions relating to the 
army, which had been submitted to 
the commander in chief on the sub- 
ject of limited service. This motion 
was resisted on the ground, that 
the opinion called for were not offi- 
cial documents, but private and 
confidential communications } and 
to the argument that the house was 
in want of military information on 
the question at present before it, 
it was answered, that it would be 
an unprecedented thing for the 
house to require argumentative opi- 
nions of those who were not its 
members, in order to influence: its 
determinations. The motion was 
negatived without a division. 
‘The house having (June 13th.) 
resolved itself into a committee on 
the mutiny bill, lord Westmorland 
objected to the clause introducing 
limited service. A debate ensued, 
in which the same arguments were 
urged on both sides which had been 
used in the house of commons, 
The opposition lords insisted much 
on the supposed invasion of the 
prerogative by the limitation of ser- 
vice in the army ; and in pressing 
this argument it was generally un- 
derstood, that they calculated with 
great confidence on the support and 
concurrence of many lords connecte 
ed with the household, who it was 
supposed would on this occasion 
desert the administration and theres 
by manifest the secret dispositions 
of the court, But, if they exter. 
tained 
