62 
tained such expectations, they were 
grievously disappointed. The no- 
ble lords to whom they were sup- 
posed to have looked for assistance, 
yoted as usual with the ministers ; 
and one of the royal dukes (his 
highness of Gloucester) made a 
speech in favour of the clause, not 
less remarkable for its eloquence 
and sound reasoning, than for the 
constitutional principles and ardent 
attachment to liberty which _ it 
breathed. The committee divided 
on the clause; for it 91 ; against it 
34; majority 57. 
On the ‘hird reading of the bill 
an amendment moved by lord 
Hawkesbury to substitute twenty 
years instead of seven, was negatived 
without a division. 
The object of the Chelsea hospi- 
tal bill, was to givea legal security 
to invalid, disabled and discharged 
soldiers, for such pensions and allow- 
ances as they were entitled to by 
reason of their service. It was ar- 
gued against this bill by Mr. Perci- 
val, that its provisions were nuga- 
tory and inefficient, and in the 
course of discussing its merits, the 
honourable gentleman entered into 
a virulent philippic against the ad. 
ministration in general, with the 
exception of the noble lord at the 
head of the treasury, and expressed 
his disapprobation of all their pro- 
ceedings since they came into office. 
The attorney general vindicated the 
bill before the house, as one that 
ought to be considered, not distinct 
from,but part passu with the mutiny 
~ pill, the provisions of both standing 
equally pledged on the faith of go- 
vernment and the discretion of his 
majesty. To the language held by 
several members of opposition, who 
in their general censures of the ad- 
ministration, had made an exception 
ANNUAL REGISTER, 1806. 
in favour of lord Grenville, ané 
affected to deplore the little share 
that noble lord seemed to have ir 
the measures of the government 
lord Temple replied with mue : 
warmth, that he could assure these | 
gentlemen, he spoke the sentiments 
of his noble relative (ord Grenville) | 
when he stated that he thanked no 
man for compliments paid to him at | 
the expence of his colleagues. 
This” 
debate in the house of commons) 
took place (June 12) the day be 
fore the decisive division in the house 
of lords on the mutiny bill, at a time! 
when many persons supposed the 
administration was drawing fast toa 
close. 
The object of the training bill 
was to enable his majesty, out of 
the persons liable to serve in the mi. 
litia, to apportion among the coun. 
ties of England, a number not ex- 
ceeding 200,000 men, and direct 
them to be enrolled and trained ac- 
cording to the provisions of the act. 
If a sufficient number of persons 
should offer themselves voluntarily 
for training, they were to be accept- 
ed ; butif not, the deficiency was to 
be supplied by the operation of the 
ballot. Volunteers and persons be- 
coming volunteers were exempted 
from this service, The days of 
training were not to exceed 24, and: 
the term of service was confined to 
one year. If immediate invasion 
was apprehended, the persens liable 
to serve under this act might be em- 
bodied by his majesty’s orders, and 
in case of actual invasion marched 
to any part of Great Britain. 
The spirit of gross and uncandid 
misrepresentation, which had mark- 
ed the opposition to the former | 
parts of Mr. Windham’s military 
plans, did not forsake his adversaries, 
while this bill was under discussion, 
They 
