ijgi- Parliamentary Proceedings, 145 



Proceedings in Parliapient. 



HOUSE OF COMMONS. 



On the Produftion of Papers refpefting the ConA'ention 



with Spaiu. 



Monday y December 13. 1790. 



jM^i? GUST faid, no man could have more refped than himfelf 

 for that part of the Conftitution, which entrufted to the execu- 

 tive power, the determination of peace and war, and the ma- 

 nagement of treaties. Of the advantages of this Jirrangement 

 he was fully fenfible, in the confidence and fecurity which it 

 produced, and the refpetft which it preferved to the State among 

 Foreign Nations. When this power, however, was entrufted, it 

 certainly was not meant that its exercife fhould not be the lub- 

 je<ft of explanation. Upon this ground he founded the motion 

 which he intended to make. In the courfe of the difpute with 

 Spain, and the condudt of the negociation, circumftances had 

 occurred which required to be explained ; and it would cer- 

 tainly never be afllrted, that the executive iiower was exempt- 

 ed from fuch an explanation, as it would then be a power with- 

 out controul, and fecure from infpedtion. Upon this principle 

 he had made the motion in the former Parliament, for produ- 

 cing fnch papers as appeared to him to be necefTary for explain- 

 irg fome circumftances in the commencement of our difpute 

 with Spain. Now, after the procefs of an cxpenfive armament, 

 and a protradt?t! negociation, fuch an explanation had become 

 imi more necelTary. It was proper to inquire, whether the dif- 

 pute had originally been occafioned by the ambition and vio- 

 lence of tlie Court of Spain, or the rafhncl?*- ignorance and pre- 

 fumption of our minifters ? It was likewife proper to inquire, 

 whether the negociation might have been conducted with lefs 

 expence or delay ? whether peace might have been fecured 

 upon better terms, or whether the terms that had been obtain- 

 ed might have been had without the facrifices with which they 

 had been attended I When he reflefted on the propriety ofthefe 

 inquiries, he fliould not have apprehended any oppolition to 

 the motion for the evidence by which they were to be eluci- 

 dated. But what was his furprife, when he liad heard it inti- 

 mated, and from the moft rcfpedtable authority, that a majority 

 of the Houfe would concur in oppofing the motion for prod>i- 

 cing fuch evidence. But whatever was the decifion iA the 

 Houfe, whatever line of condud on the prefcnt occafion their 

 fiutiments of duty might induce them to piu'fue, he coniidered 

 it as his duty to ftand forward to move for the neceflary docu- 

 ments ; and in this perfualion would proceed to enumerate the 

 grounds upon whicli he founded his motion. 



He then went into a wide range of argument, to fhow the 

 propriety of this meafure, — Hated the conduit of adminiftia 

 Vol. V. T t 



