GENERAL HISTORY 



[909 



those officers clothed with the au- 

 thority ot" the statesmen in whose 

 opinions and measures they must 

 be supposed to concur, as they still 

 held their places under them. — 

 After several other pointed obser- 

 vations on this topic, the hon. and 

 learned gentleman concluded with 

 moving a resolution, in substance. 

 That it appeared to this House, 

 that as peace had been concluded 

 for more than six months, and the 

 country enjoyed internal tranquil- 

 lity, the still keeping part of the 

 militia force embodied was obvious- 

 ly contrary to the intent and spirit 

 of the act of the 42nd of the king, 

 and a yiolation of the principles of 

 the constitution. 



The Solicitor General avowed, 

 that notwithstanding the arguments 

 of his hon. and learned friend, he 

 still held the opinion on the subject 

 which he had given. He acknow- 

 ledged that ministers would act il- 

 legally, if they advised his Majesty 

 to call out the militia except in one 

 of the cases specified in the act ; 

 but as no specific period had been 

 assigned at which it was to be dis- 

 embodied, he would assert, that 

 they having been legally embodied, 

 it was legal to keep them so. He 

 did not say that such was the in- 

 tention of the legislature, but look- 

 ing at the letter of the law, and 

 called upon to give his opinion as 

 lawyer upon it, he must say he 

 saw no illegality in keeping part 

 of the militia force still embodied. 

 Whether this exercise of the pre- 

 rogative in the present instance 

 were a discreet one, was a different 

 question ; and in this, us well as 

 on all other exercises of the royal 

 prerogative, the ministers were 

 responsible. 



Vol. LVI. 



Lord Milton wished tiie learned 

 gentleman, instead of confining 

 himself to the mere letter of the 

 act, had also taken into considera- 

 tion its obvious meaning and spirit. 

 He should be glad to know what 

 opinion he would venture to put 

 upon paper had the quesLion been 

 stated in these terms : " When the 

 militia was once embodied, was it 

 lawful for the crown to keep them 

 embodied as long as it should think 

 proper ?" The argument of the 

 learned gentleman would go the 

 length of saying, that when once 

 the crown had been able to get 

 the militia out, it might retain 

 them to all eternity. Looking at 

 the mere letter of the law, without 

 regarding its intention, might do 

 very well for a special pleader ; but 

 it might be expected from amember 

 of parliament, speaking in his place, 

 on an act of great constitutional 

 importance, that he would have an 

 opinion about its intention and 

 spirit. In time of war, parliament 

 had a right to expect that gentle- 

 men of a certain fortune and situa- 

 tion should come forward to officer 

 the militia ; but if it were laid 

 down that those regiments might 

 be kept up at the pleasure of 

 the crown, it could not be ex- 

 pected that the same descrip- 

 'tion of men could be found for 

 oncers. 



Sir A. Pigott was decidedly of 

 opinion that it was most unconsti- 

 tutional to keep up the militia six 

 months after the definitive treaty 

 of peace. Nothing could be clearer, 

 than that when the purposes of 

 calling out the militia ceased, the 

 power of embodying them must 

 cease. The construction which 

 the learned gentleman had put 



[P] 



