1792. political progre/s of Britain. 163 
* engaged in the affairs of the continent*.” After re~ 
flecting on this transaction, the reader will judge 
whether I was wrong in comparing the annals of the 
cabinet, with the annals of Tyburn. Lord Sandwich 
was followed by the duke of Bedford, who ‘ enlar~ 
‘* ged onthe same subject: He said, it had been sus~ 
‘¢ pected, nor was the suspicion without foundation, 
‘‘ that the measures of the Englifh ministry had 
* long been regulated by the interest of his majesty’s 
“* electoral territories ; that these had been long con- 
«¢ sidered as a GULPH, into which the treasure of 
‘© Britain had been thrown; that the state of Ha- 
«< nover had been changed without any visible cause, 
* since the accefsion of her princes to the throne of 
«“ England. Afluence had begun. to,wanton in her 
** towns, and gold to glitter in her cottages, without 
“* the discovery of mines, or the increase of her com=. 
“¢ merce; and new deminions had been purchased, 
‘* of which the value. was never paid from the reve 
‘¢ nues of Hanover.” Had lord Stanhope, lord Sand~ 
wich, and the duke of Bedford, been persons of infe- 
rior rank, such language would have cost them their 
lives; for a more disgraceful and, contemptuous ac-= 
cusation was never advanced against any sovereign: 
We are in the habit of sailing at tyrants who have 
filled their palaces with domestic afsafsination. But 
the author of an unprovoked war is certainly answer- 
able for the lives of those victims who fall in the 
course of it ; and what is the moral distinction be- 
tween the murders of the bed chamber, and those of 
the field of battle? Lord Bathurst and Pulteney, by 
that time earl of Bath, a person distinguithed eves 
* Smollet. 
