3g2 
3 
- aid upon the people, to the amount of 
s;500,0001. For thefe, and other rea- 
fons which he flated, he thought that 
at muft be the general opinion, that a 
<ommittee ought to be appointed, to in- 
quire into the expenditure and general 
State of the nation. 
The motion was oppofed by Mr. Jen- 
kinfon, who admitted the peculiar privi- 
lege of the Houfe of Commons, to exer- 
ele inqurftorial powers over the purfe 
of the nation, and to took with jealouty 
upon the public expenditure ; but he ob- 
ferved, that the houfe was, at the fame 
thine, equally called upon for confidence 
in chofe, who were refponfible for the 
exaétne(s of that expenditure. Tr was 
bound, in the one inffance, to ufe the 
caution, without which, its conftituents 
would be its dupes ; and in the othernot 
te withhold a conftitutional confidence. 
keyond which, he faid, the prefent ad- 
mainiftration never carried its demands. 
Without fuch confidence, the meafures 
of any minifter mu& be inefficacious. He 
denied that the prefent war was more 
expenfive than others. It was not fo, he 
faid, if the fame allowance for the de- 
ereafed value of money was made in 
affairs of ftate, which every man made in 
his own family. One reafon for this de- 
ereafe, was the flourifhing fiate of com- 
merce ; and for this reafon, and not for 
the extravagance of minifters, every war 
was neceflarily, In appearance, more ex- 
Penfive than the preceding ones. Nor 
was it only the decreafe of the value of 
money that conftituted this difference. 
‘The refources and expenditure of the 
enemy, dctermined the amount of the 
refources to be applied to, and the ex- 
‘penditure to be ufed in oppofition to 
them. In the prefent war, which he 
would ftil} affirm to be juft and neceffary, 
we were contending with an enemy, 
whofe refources were no more to be efti- 
mated than their mode of attack. The 
~ prefent application of the public money, 
he faid, was unprecedently judicious and 
«economical ; and the revenue was even 
More produétive, under the prefent ad- 
mMintiration, in time of war, than it had 
_ been formerly in time of peace. He af- 
tcrwards made fome obfervations on the 
conguefts which had been made during 
the courfe of the prefent war, and laid 
particular ftrefs on the capture of the 
cape of Good Hope, and the Dutch fet- 
. tlementrs in the Eaft Indies, and the ac- 
guifition of the kingdom of Corfica. 
The motion was alfo oppofed by Mr. 
Britifh Parliameni. 
{ March 
William Pulterey, Mr. M. Montague, 
Sir Gregory Page Turner, and Mr, 
Steele ; and was fuppoerted by Mr. Curwen 
and Mr. Martin. The chancellor of the 
exchequer did not {peak upon the occafion. 
On a divifzon, the numbers for Mr. Grey’s 
motion were 45, and against it 207. 
On the 15th of the month, a long de- 
bate took place, on a motion of Mr. 
Wuberforce, for taking into confideration 
the report on the bill for abolifhing the 
African flave trade. An amendment 
was propofed by Gen. Tarleton, that 
the report fhould be deferred till that 
day four months; an® this motion was 
carried by a majority; fo that the bill 
for the abolition of this INFAMOUS 
TRADE, is loft for the prefent. The 
numbers were, for General Tarleton’s 
amendment, 74, againft it 70. 
On the 16th, a debate took place in the 
houfe of commons, upon the bill for efta- 
blifhing new wet docks upon the river 
Thames; and a motion was made by Mr. 
Pitt, and carried, that the bill fhould be 
read a fecond time, on the rrth of April. 
A motion was allo made by Alderman 
Luthington, and carried, that a com- 
mittee fhould be appointed to confider 
the beft mode of rendering the port of 
London more corrmodious for the recep- 
tion of fhipping, and the purpofes of 
trade; and the city members were ap- 
pointed to thé fame committee. 
On the 23d, Lord Moira prefented a bill 
on the fubjeét of debtors and creditors ; 
which, he faid,was founded upon the prin- 
ctple of the bill of r794. He had liftened 
to,and weighed with the utmoft attention, 
all the arguments ufed on that meafure, 
and the refulr was, that he found that 
conviction, which had long poffeffed his 
breaft, was ftilt unfhaken. He had laid 
afide in this bill the confideration of im- 
prifonment on mefne proce/s, as he found 
. 1t fo intricate, that he could not reduce 
it to any rule; but he had extended it 
in another inftance. By the former bill, 
creditors could not compel the ce/fio bo- 
xorznz, but in this they might force their 
debtors to give up their property, and 
by that means defeat the intentions of 
thofe debtors, who, having property, 
chofe rather to fet their creditors at defi- 
ance, and fquander it away in prifon, 
But in thefe circumftances, much muft 
depend upon the peculiarity of each cafe, 
and large difcretionary power muft be 
vefted in the juftices, who muft apply 
them as their judgment direéted. By 
the former Dill, the benefits only a- 
, tached 
