to the understanding of the public should on no account be suffered; either under the fanction of a benefit, a temporary occafion, or any other additional infult: but the indolent, or ignorant botcher, fhould alike be hooted from the ftage; the first with indignation and refentment, the laft with contempt and pity; in fpite of the unnatural introduction of the words Rodney, Gibraltar! or any other palpable trap for vulgar applaufe! Indeed, we know not well how to excufe the managers-Mr. Colman in particular, accomplished scholar as he undoubtedly is-for fuffering fuch grofsly barbarous and illiterate trash to be fung

or faid' at the theatre. It was not so in the other Little Great Man's time!

VAUXHALL.

N Saturday night, the 16th inftant, or per haps more properly on Sunday morning the 17th, Vauxhall clofed for this feafon, without the rioting and diforder ufual on a laft night. This was effected by a manoeuvre of the proprietors, who gave out that it was intended to clofe on the Thurfday following; but at three o'clock on Sunday morning the waiters and people attending the place were fuddenly called in and discharged.

HOUSE OF LORDS. (Continued from Page 59.)

PASSE

MAY 5.

ASSED the Eaft India, St. Ann's, and Covent Garden Paving bills, with the bill for repealing the act relative to Volunteers. Read a first time the Hanvil Inclofure bill. The clerk was then proceeding to read the order of the day for the Loan bill, when Lord Shelburne faid he wished to fubmit to the confideration of the Houfe a few refolutions which had been fuggefted by a noble viscount, (Lord Stormont) who in a fpeech in that Houfe, fome little time fince, had alledged, that the Commons claimed not only a peculiar, but an exclufive privilege, in the management and inftitution of money-bills. This was a pofition, he said, neither founded in common fenfe nor juftice, confequently should ever meet with his reprobation. There were, it was true, privileges peculiar to that Houfe, but this was common to both Houses, their united intereft being involved in all pecuniary grants. Doctrines of this complexion had prevailed for a century past, and a conftant innovation had taken place in the other Houfe; it was their lordships duty, therefore, as they valued the conftitution, to refift encroachments tending to annihilate that equilibrium which had made it the admiration of mankind.

The wifeft men, fince the reign of William the Third, his lordship faid, had remarked and deplored this innovation, as the order, beauty, regularity, and even the very existence of our political liberty, depended on the exact confinement of the feveral branches of the legiflature to their respective jurifdictions.

This, however, was not a new complaint; there having been a folemn decifion, fo early as the year 1673, in favour of the Lords, on a queftion fimilar to the prefent; when it was declared, that the Upper Houfe had a right to interpofe, controul, advife, pafs, or reject, any money-bill which did not meet with their approbation.

Upon this ground he fupported himself in moving refolutions which appeared to him neceffary and expedient, on account of many hints and public affertions of men, that the Lords had no right to interfere in the difpofal of money bills,

But how can any man in his fenfes (continued his lordship) pretend to affert, that the Peers, fo confiderable a body of the component fociety, have not a right to exercife their judgment in the difpofal of public money? And if at any period they could be juftifiable in their vigilance, it must be at this hour, when a loan was negotiated on terms the moft difadvantageous that ever were recorded; for they were not only more extravagant than they had ever been in times of peace, but they were as bad as could be complied with even in time of war. Men boafted of economy, and acted with profufion; they coalefced, it was certain, in many measures feemingly irreconcile able, but how they could reconcile the loan with their profeffions of economy and public virtue, he was at a lofs to conjecture. The loans of the five last years were uniformly reprobated by men whofe talents were now exerted in recommending and defending the prefent one on the principle of neceffity.

It was in the recollection of their lordships, and ftrongly impreffed on the memory of a fuffering people, that in the year 1782, a noble peer, then at the head of affairs, was ftigmatized for negotiating a loan at that time thought prodigal, and which contributed to his removal perhaps as much as all his ruinous measures of blood and calamity: yet the prefent loan was infinitely worfe, though panegyrized by the very men who cenfured the former. Such were the fruits of coalition, and the happiness derived from an oppofition to men, who had at least the merit of terminating the unnatural carnage which difgraced and reduced us to the verge of ruin.

His lordship then moved, first, that all future loans fhould be fo conducted, as to have a tendency to reduce the national debt: and, fecondly, that fuch a fyftem of economy should hereafter be adopted in all negotiations of this fort, as fhould evidence a difpofition to retrenchment in every department of the state.

Several members of the Houfe then spoke upon the bill; but being divided in their opinions, Lord Shelburne faid he would chearfully meet the investigation of the fubject, and dared the prefent coalition to try the queftion. He had the confidence of the public to fhelter him from any threats, of which many had been used; and the fame temper that urged them would carry

them

them into execution, if there was any fupport for them, or the leaft foundation in truth or honour in the charges that were infinuated. What credit thefe futilities obtained with a people relieved by his best exertions from the horrors of a civil war, and an unequal conteft with the greatest powers in Europe, every day furnished ample testimony.

The questions upon the feveral refolutions being then put, were negatived. MAY 6.

The royal affent was given by commiffion to nine public and three private bills. The commiffioners were, the Earls of Mansfield and Carlife, and Lord Viscount Stormont.

Read a fecond time the Hanvil Inelofure bill. Ordered the judges to be fummoned for the morrow, to give their opinions in a writ of error, and on Bayntun's Divorce bill.

Counsel was then called to the bar on Lewis's Divorce bill, when witneffes were produced to prove that a feparation had taken place between Mr. Lewis and his wife, and that a child had been born during that feparation. One of the witneffes depofed, that he had given a letter to Mr. Lewis, written by Mrs. Lewis juft before her lying-in, but not delivered till after that circumftance. This letter contained a full con feffion of her criminality.

Lord Thurlow, however, gave it as his opinion, that the reading it would be totally improper, unlefs their lordships thought it neceffary to deviate from the general rule which had hitherto been adopted, that of reprobating every circumstance in a bufinefs of that nature which had the appear. ance of collufion, and here, he thought, was a pretty prefumptive proof of fuch an appearance. Their lordships were told, that the gentleman and his wife had determined to feparate, for what reafon, or on what account, they were left to form their own opinion; not the leaft charge of even a fufpicion of incontinence being urged; nay, the arguments had rather turned to prove there was no fufpicion, for Mr. Lewis had not only maintained her during that feparation, but had kept up a regular correfpondence with her, which was more, in his opinion, than any man would do, if he thought his wife was living in adultery. She had left him from whim, and he fuppofed the fame whim had induced her to wifh for a di vorce; therefore any confeffion, according to his ideas, ought not to be admitted as evidence at their lordships bar.

It had

Lord Sydney faid, he did not mean to vindicate the practice of admitting fuch evidence in general, but merely to submit to their lordships, whether, in the prefent cafe, fome little attention might not be paid to the circumftances under which the letter had been written. been written in one of the most awful moments, when he had her diffolution in view; nor had fhe at that time meant it for her husband's eye, unless the should not furvive. This bad ftruck him as a forcible argument in it's favour, and he had therefore mentioned it for their lordships confideration.

Lord Mansfield feemed fearful, if the letter was admitted as evidence, that it would be a

most dangerous precedent. If it had been meant to corroborate any facts they had to produce, in that cafe he should have no objection to it's being received; but, from what he understood, the letter was to establish those facts. The noble lord had obferved, fhe had written it at a moft awful moment, but the danger was over when the letter was delivered by her for her husband, who had moft fortunately difcovered her place of retreat, though he went by another name, on that very identical day he had fo much apprehended: this was certainly a moft lucky circumftance for him to ground his petition for a di vorce apon, as otherwise the husband would have been a total franger to his wife's having been pregnant. Their lordships ought likewife to recollect, that he was not charged with having an unlawful connection with any particular perfon, nor any perfon unknown; nor had the fet up any defence, either at their lordships bar, or in the courts below; he did not, therefore, think that her letter onght to be paid any particular attention to, unless they could produce facts which it might ferve to corroborate.

The queftion being now put, whether the letter fhould be read, the fame was negatived; and on the counfel's declaring they had no farther evidence, the committing of it was likewise negatived, and the bill rejected.

MAY 7.

Paffed the American Document bill. Read a fecond time the Militia Pay bill. Deferred the farther confideration of Bayntun's Divorce bill till Monday, and ordered the judges to attend. Adjourned.

MAY 9.

The order of the day being read for proceed. ing on the caufe between the Bishop of London and Mr. Ffytche,

Lord Thurlow entered largely into the queftion, confidering the appeal in every point of view, and condemning the idea of a clergyman's giving a bond to his patron for any confideration, on his being prefented to a living: among many other matters, he fuppofed the patron to differ in fome points of religion from the established church; and, with a view of having those points omitted where he had a right of presentation, thought he might oblige the incumbent, before poffeffion of the living, to enter into a refignationbond, by which the incumbent would be entirely fubject to the patron's will, and of course be obliged to acquiefce in his requifitions; though for the doing this the bishop had likewise an undoubted right to difpoffefs him: if the incumbent continued in the doctrine, contrary to the injunction of his patron; even here, admitting the bond to come within the charge of fimony, the patron might fue for the penalty, and come upon the tithes for the recovery. The patron, howhe confidered as nothing more than a trustee for the public in the difpofal of the living; and that thofe livings fhould not be improperly beftowed, it was requifite there fhould be a right fomewhere to examine into the merits of the prefented. This right he thought justly vested in the bishoprics; but the ecclefiaftical law went

ever,

ftill farther, there being a check over these, by an appeal to the metropolitan; fo that it was not in the power of any bishop to reject the perfon prefented by the patron, unless he was deftitute of the qualifications neceffary for the charge. His lordship adduced a number of fimilar cafes, and urged a variety of judicious remarks to illuftrate the impropriety of fuch bonds being legal; and in defence of the bishop's having refused to admit the clerk prefented by Mr.Ffytche, thought there were grounds to fuppofe fuch a bond had actually been given, as the parties had refused to prove the contrary; but as the decision in a cafe of this nature was of fo material a confequence, his lordship wished the Houfe to consider it on the most copious grounds, and suffer him to take the opinion of the judges then present upon a few questions he had drawn up. His lordship concluded by moving his queftions, which went principally to know, whether bonds given in fuch cafes, under a variety of different circumftances, were to be confidered as fimoniacal, or legal.

Lord Mansfield begged leave to add two queftions more, which he was of opinion would fet the matter in a clearer light. This being complied with, it was propofed to allow the judges proper time to reply; and for this reafon the farther confideration of the appeal was deferred till Monday fortnight.

MAY 12.

The royal affent was given by commiffion to four bills, viz. the American Intercourse, Militia Pay, Clerkenwell Poor, and Mr. Grefley's Eftate, bills.

Sir John Skynner, chief baron of the Exchequer, then delivered to the Houfe the opinion of the twelve judges on the following question"Whether the iffue born of a woman, after twelve months from the day of her elopement from her husband, and living apart from him in open adultery; fuch husband, having inftituted a fuit in the Ecclefiaftical Court, and no accefs proved, be, or be not, a baftard?' Which opinion was,

That no matter of law being fubmitted to them in the propofition, they did not think themselves competent to decide on a conclufion of facts.'

Lord Thurlow recapitulated the arguments he had before used on Bayntun's Divorce bill, adhering ftill to the principle, that the House were not competent to decide upon the point of baftardy, that being a matter of property. He defended his fentiments with refpect to the prefumption of the child being legitimate, where the non-accefs of the husband was not proved; and stated feveral cafes and acts of parliament to the fame purpofe, particularly thofe of the 11th of Henry IV. and the 38th of Henry III. which, he faid, did not take away the continency of the woman, in cafe of a baftard, unless the non-accefs was proved. The learned lord, among other circumftances, mentioned one of a woman married to a man, who was so debilitated by debauchery, as to make him incapable of generation; but which woman, notwithstanding, had a child. The fact of bastardy was to be fubftantiated by the evidence of the furgeon who

attended the husband, and the non-accefs of the parties; yet, though the debility was proved, it was not fufficient, as the husband had been in London, where the woman lived, once within the year of her pregnancy: and had it not been for the bare-faced perjury of a witnefs brought to prove access, the child would not have been baftardized. His lordip then entered into the recital of the evidence given in the courfe of the trial; which, he faid, amounted to this→ that a hufband found his wife unfaithful to his bed and being of a soft, eafy, good-natured difpofition, accepted with tears the ring the returned him, recommending her to the care of the adulterer, and feeking a divorce, to enable her to marry the man who had defiled his bed, and continued to live within eight miles of her for a confiderable time after the feparation. Lord Thurlow concluded with wishing that Mr. Bayntun had put his defign in execution, of going out of the kingdom from the first day of fufpecting the adultery till the time of obtaining the divorce, as that would have been clear proof of non-acceís.

Lord Bathurst contended that the learned lord's quotations went against his argument; as, in civil law, the child is baftardized on proof of the adultery; and in this cafe there was fufficient proof to fubftantiate the presumption of non accefs.

The bill was then ordered to be reported.

R

HOUSE OF COMMONS,

(Continued from Page 62.)

MAY 5

ECEIVED and read a petition from Suf

folk and Haftings, relative to a parliamentary reform; which was ordered to lie on the table. Lord Mahon prefented a bill to prevent fraudulent votes being given at elections; which was read a first time, and ordered to be printed.

Humphry Minchin, Efq. and J. Wallace, Efq. (the Attorney General) took the oaths and their feats.

Lord Maitland read to the Houfe a petition figned by four perfons, complaining of the commander in chief, for not having, at their request, ordered a court-martial to try feveral complaints brought against Sir James Lowther, for peculation, oppreffion, and other mal-practices, while he commanded the Weftmoreland Militia. His lordthip faid the petition had been three months in hand; and finding the allegations contained in it were of a very serious nature, and being informed that there were proofs to fupport thofe allegations, he thought it his duty to prefent the petition, and moved that it be brought up.

Mr. D. P. Coke feconded the motion.

General Conway gave a very long history of the whole bufinefs, from it's firft origin, in July 1781, to the prefent day. The principal charges exhibited against the honourable baronet werethat he had given falfe certificates of the raifing of fome companies in his regiment-that he fupported thefe certificates by false musters and returns; and by drawing on the agents for full companies,

Companies, converted large fums of the public money to his own ufe-and that the regiment were in rags, and their arms unferviceable. The general added, that, as foon as he came into office, he fent directions to the commanding officer of the district, where the regiment lay, to enquire into the foundation of these charges. The refult of the officer's enquiries was laid before a board of general officers, who were of opinion, that there was not fufficient ground for trial by Court-martial: here he thought it his duty, therefore, to reft, and not to order a trial. As to the charge of falfe mufters, he believed it to be abLolutely groundless, from the report of the commanding-officer who reviewed the regiment, and who found it compleat, and extremely well difciplined. The charge relative to the cloathing was ftili more groundlefs; as he himself faw it, and found it finer than that of any other regiment. There was alfo a complaint of bills unpaid, and that the honourable baronet had appropriated the money to his own ufe. He himfelf had feen fome of thefe bills; one for 11. 14s. another for gs. and a third for 51. Now, when the honourable baronet's circumftances were confidered, and the expence he had been at for his regiment, one must laugh at the idea of his hav ing put fuch fums into his pocket. As to the arms, they certainly were in a bad condition; but this was not the honourable baronet's fault, as they had been twenty years in ute. Upon the whole, having the best proofs that the charges were groundless, it was not at all furprizing that he did not fend the honourable baronet to trial; and he was not a little aftonished, that as the noble lord had been poffeiled of the petition three months, he did not prefent it fooner, before the regiment was disbanded.

Sir James Lowther then entered into his own defence, drawing a picture of his own circumftances, and thofe of his accufers; ftyling himself the owner of the land, fire, and even water, of Whitehaven; a town which was nourished by the foftering care of his family, who found not a houfe there, but left it in fo flourishing a condition, that it now contained 16,000 inhabitants, and having 300 fhips.conftantly employed. He alfo claimed the merit of having got his men for three guineas and two guineas each, fo that he did, not interfere with the recruiting of the army: he had made his officers a prefent, out of his own pocket, of the expences they had been at in raifing their men, and had paid 300l. to Mr. Rice, the mufic-mafier, for teaching his regimentalband, and for mufical inftruments: after this, he little thought he should be accufed of peculation; and dwelt much on the poverty of his ac cufers, feeming to infer, from that circumstance, that therefore they were the more capable of calumny.

Sir Charles Turner called him to order, fay ing he could not fuffer fuch reflections to be caft upon the poor; that none would ever petition that Houfe, if they were to be condemned on account of their poverty; and as that was the place where the poor and unprotected had the best chance to obtain redrefs, he would ever lean. tor

the fide of the poor as far as justice would permit him.

Mr. Fox complimented the noble lord on his motion for bringing up the petition, afcribing to him the most patriotic intentions; but did not approve of fuch petitions being brought to that House, as it would eventually become a court of appeal from every man who fhould think he had caufe of complaint. He profeffed himself perfectly satisfied with the honourable baronet's defence, and hoped his noble friend would not urge the petition.

Lord Maitland faid, his reafon for not prefenting it fooner was, that he waited till the government of the country should be fettled, holding it his duty to prefent the petition of the poorest man in the kingdom, equally with that of the richest; but without pledging himself for the truth of the allegations.

Mr. Alderman Townshend, Mr. Martyn, and Captain Keith Stewart, alfo fpoke; after which the question being put on the motion for bringing forward the petition, it paffed in the nega tive, and the Houfe adjourned. MAY 6.

Paffed the Militia bill.

The call of the Houfe was then made; when there appeared to be not less than 500 members prefent.

Mr. W. Pitt feeing Lord North in his place, faid, it was reported that the noble lord remained in that Houfe only for the purpose of oppofing the propofition he intended to make next day? if he had this bufinefs fo much at heart, he would ask him whether he would confent that the House fhould then refolve itfelf into a committee, to take into confideration the refolutions he should then have the honour to propose.

Lord North replied, that to spread a report that he remained in that Houfe for any one particular purpofe, was very indecent: it became not him to fay when he should be called to the other House, or whether he should ever be honoured with a feat there, that depending on the power and will of others: but whether his ftay in the Houfe of Commons fhould be fhort or long, he would always do his duty, and give his opinion freely on every fubject. As to the question put to him by the right honourable gentleman, he would give this anfwer, that he would not confent that the refolutions which he intended for the morrow should be difcuffed in a committee, as to countenance fuch a proceeding would in fome measure amount to an approbation of the prin ciple of making a reform in that House, to which he should not, for the prefent, give his vote. There might, perhaps, be fome imperfections in the prefent ftate of reprefentation, but this was, in his opinion, an improper time for entering upon a reform.

Governor Johnstone thought the right honour able member should have stated the nature of his propofitions: for his part, he would oppose any motion for a committee till he should know what was to be difcuffed in it.

Mr. Pitt did not chufe his propofitions should be known till he moved them, that they might not be prejudged.

MAY 7.

Several petitions were prefented, praying a reformation in the reprefentation of the people in parliament: one by Mr. Masham, from the freeholders of the county of Kent; another from those whose freeholds lie in the city of London; a third by Mr. Byng, from the housholders of the Tower Hamlets; and a fourth by Mr. Fox, from the electors of Westminster.

Mr. W. Pitt then opened the business, by declaring, that he had never felt more embarraffment or anxiety than at that moment, when he found himself obliged, for his country's good, to lay before the Houfe the imperfections of that conftitution to which every Englishman ought to look up with reverential awe; a conftitution which, while it continued as it was framed by our ancestors, was justly esteemed the effect of the moft confummate wifdom. Raised by that conftitution, to greatness and glory, England had been at once the envy and pride of the world; Europe was taught by experience, that liberty was the foundation of true greatnefs; and that while England remained under a free government, fhe never failed to perform exploits which dazzled the neighbouring nations: but a melancholy chain of events, which had eclipfed the glory of Britain, exhibited a reverse of fortune, which could only be accounted for upon this principle, that during the last fifteen years, there had been a deviation from the principles of that happy conftitution, under which the people of England had fo long Aourished. It was not for him, with unhallowed hands, to touch the venerable pile, and deface the fabric; to fee it ftand in need of repair was fufficiently melancholy; but the more he revered it, the more he wifhed to fecure it's duration to the latest pofterity, the greater he felt the necef. fity of guarding against it's decay. Innovations were at all times dangerous; and should never be attempted, but when abfolutely neceffary. Upon this principle he had given up the idea he had fuggefted to the Houfe laft year; and his object at present was not to innovate, but rather to renew and invigorate the conftitution. When he submitted his propofitions to the House last year, he was told the fubject was not to be difcuffed amidst the din of arms: the objection was not without it's force; but at prefent it could not be repeated, as we were now in the enjoyment of peace. This, therefore, was a proper time to enter upon the bufinefs of a reformation, which every man muft be fatisfied was abfolutely necessary. An Englishman who should compare the flourishing ftate of this country but twenty years ago, with that of her prefent humiliation, must be convinced, that the ruin now brought on her has come on by How degrees, and almost imperceptibly, from fomething wrong in the conftitution: that fome radical error exifted, no one seemed to doubt; all were clearly fatisfied of it, and various remedies had been devised by those who wished to remove it. The House itself had discovered that a fecret, influence of the crown was fapping the very foundation of liberty: the influence of the crown had been felt within those walls, and had often been ftrong enough to over-rule the fenfe of duty. VOL. III.

The Commons, in former parliaments, had been bafe enough to feed the influence which enslaved them, and to become at once the parent and offspring of corruption. This influence had now rifen to fuch a height, that men were ashamed any longer to deny it, and the House had been driver to the neceflity of voting that it ought to be diminished. Various were the expedients which had been thought of for this falutary purpose. Among them, was one to extend the right of voting for members of parliament, at prefent fo confined, to all the inhabitants of the kingdom; fo that every man without distinction should enjoy that franchife. This expedient, he underftood, had been thought by fome the only one confiftent with a free conftitution. For his own part, he disapproved of this mode; as it was impoffible to adopt it without reproaching our forefathers, who had framed the conftitution with fo much wisdom: for if this doctrine were to obtain, nearly one half of the people would be flaves, as it was impoffible that the giving to every man a right of voting, however pleafing it might appear, could be reduced to practice. And though it were practicable, ftill one half of the nation would be flaves, as all who voted for the unfuccefsful candidate, could not, according to this doctrine, be faid to be reprefented in parliament. It was still harder with thofe members who should themfelves be made flaves, to be governed by laws to which they had not given their confent, and against which they actually voted. His idea of reprefentation, however, was this, that the members chofen were the reprefentatives of the people at large; and this being his principle, he could not confent to an innovation founded on doctrines which went fo far as to fay, that neither the prefent, nor any other Houfe of Commons, had ever been a true and conftitutional reprefentation of the people; as no House of Commons had ever yet beeen elected by all the men in the kingdom. The country had profpered for a confiderable period, and even attained the fummit of glory, though this doctrine had never been adopted; and he hoped no one would ever attempt to introduce it, or treat it in any other light than as a mere fpeculative propofition. The fecond expedient he had heard of was, to abolish the franchise enjoyed by feveral boroughs of returning members to ferve in parliament. Thefe places were known by the popular appellation of rotten boroughs. He confeffed there was fomething very plausible in this idea, but ftill he was not for adopting it; he confidered those boroughs in the light of deformities, which disfigured the constitution, but which, he feared, could not be removed without endangering the whole fabric. It was true that the reprefentation of the people could not be right, unless the interefts of the representatives and the reprefented were the fame: the moment they became different, the liberty of the people was in danger; as thofe who ought to be the guardians of it might find their account in confining it to narrower limits, or in carrying through measures which might effectually deftroy it. It was to be admitted, however, that though the