would not be under the controul of any military law in thofe garrifons; that the Mutiny A&t did not reach them, being confined to thofe troops only, who were therein fpecified, or voted by parliament; that it would not be pretended, that they carried their own laws along with them; when there, they muft to all intents and purposes be subject to those of England; thus all military fubordination would be at an end the moment of their arrival; and an action at common law would lie against their officers, for any punithment which they inflicted. It was faid, that the putting foreigners in poffeffion of thofe great barriers of our commerce and mari time power, was alfo exceptionable in point of fecurity. The truft was of too great a magnitude to be repofed in aliens, who had no intereft in its prefervation. Upon the whole it was concluded and infifted upon, that the King had no right to maintain, in any part of the dominions of the British crown, any troops, other than are confented to by parliament, both as to number and to nation. The Lords in administration, avowed and juftified the measure. They denied its offending either against the letter or the fpirit of the Bill of Rights. The claufe which was fuppofed to affect this meafure, must be taken with the conditions which were annexed to it, and could extend no farther; one of these related to the bringing troops "within the kingdom,' and another fpecifies "in time of peace;" nothing can be more demonftrably evident, than that the troops in question are not within the kingdom; and it is not to be That the King had been at all times competent to raise or keep an army in time of war or rebellion, in any part of his dominions; that this competence was rather confirmed than leffened by the Bill of Rights; that the bill made no diftinction between an army of natives and foreigners; that this was no novel doctrine, but had been repeatedly brought into practice fince the Revolution, in times when the rights of the people were a fully understood, and their prefervation as carefully attended to as at prefent; and that foreigners had not only been hired, but brought into the kingdom, without the previous consent of parliament. They, however, contended, that were all this ftrong ground given up, ftill the Bill of Rights being retrofpective and declaratory,' could bear no view to poffeffions which were not at that time in the crown. The expediency of the measure, and the neceffity of its being timely adopted, were alfo infifted upon; and it was much argued, that fuch a cenfure would fhew a fhameful diftruft of the crown, at a time when it could not be juftified with the smallest appearance of reason. To thefe and other arguments in the the fame line it was replied, that it was beneath the dignity, and contrary to the liberal conftruction and comprehenfive views of that houfe, to enter into the quibbles and diftinctions of WeftminsterHall; to weigh words and fentences, to define their diftinct, legal, or grammatical import, was for others, not for them. They were to confider the spirit, the intention, the circumftances that led to, and the evils that were to be cured, by that folemn compact between the King and the people, the Bill of Rights. These they were to confider as legislators, as the hereditary guardians of that new magna charta, which includes within its pale all the liberties of the people of England, not as lawyers, who wanted to explain away its fubftance, or to find loopholes to creep through. That bill was a capitulation between the people and their newly elected fovereign; a compact to be for ever binding on their refpective pofterity and fucceffors. It claimed no new rights, it required no favours; it declared old rights; what was already the law and the conftitution; and particularly provided against thofe violations of them, which were then more immediately felt. Of thefe, the keeping of a ftanding army, without the confent of parliament, was the firft in danger and magnitude, and had been recently experienced; this giant evil had already fubverted the liberties of all the other states in Europe, and had nearly fwallowed up our own. This deftroyer of the rights of nations was accordingly provided againft, as far as compacts can bind man kind, and as wisdom can govern futurity. The conftruction now attempted to be put upon the words "within the kingdom," it was faid, might be carried to an extent, which the noble lords on the other fide might not be willing to avow. If these terms did not include all the poffeffions belonging to this country, then armies of foreigners, to any amount, might be introduced into Jersey, Guernsey, Ireland, and even Scotland, which was not at that time within the kingdom. Can it be feriously contended, that this is in the intention or fpirit of the Bill of Rights? Or that when the maintaining an army of natives within England and Wales, was deemed dangerous to the rights and liberties of the people, the furrounding and befieging them with hofts of foreigners, was an object neither of jealoufy nor apprehenfion. The diftinctions made between a time of peace and war, and the great latitude of power attributed to the crown in the latter inftance, were equally controverted, and faid neither to be warranted by the law, nor by any cuftomary usage; that if the arguments used on that head were carried to their full extent, it would neceffarily follow, that an infurrection, or war, in the remoteft part of this widely extended empire, would render it legal in the crown to introduce armies of foreigners, of any nation, and to any amount, even into this kingdom. The inference attempted to be drawn from the word foreigners not being expreffed in the law, was, it was faid, too puerile to deferve a serious confideration, if it. it had not been for the great ftrefs which feemed to be laid upon it by fome lords on the other fide; but can it be thought or believed, that when it was deemed dangerous to entrust the fword in the hands of a standing army of natives, it fhould be confidered as perfectly wife, legal, conftitutional, and fafe, to place it in those of foreigners? It was abfolutely denied that foreign troops had been brought into the kingdom at any time fince the Revolution, without the previous confent of parliament, either by an addrefs, or by fome former treaty which it had ratified. Such was the cafe of the Heffians in the years 1745 and 1756, upon which fo much weight had been laid; in the first inftance, the measure had the fanction of an addrefs from both houfes to the throne; and in the fecond, it was covered by an exifting treaty, which had already received the approbation of parliament. As to the hiring of foreign troops, and afterwards prevailing on parliament to ratify the engagements, it did not at all come up to the point in queftion, though it could be fhewn, that even this practice had in other times been an object of much animadverfion and cenfure. thoufand; yet in fuch a feafon of urgent neceffity, when the propriety of the measure did not admit of a doubt, that great statesman the Earl of Chatham, would not ven ture upon raifing a German regiment of 4000 men for the American fervice, under any colour of the royal prerogative, but waited to go through the formalities, and to receive the fanction of an act of parliament for the purpose. And fuch precautions were taken at that time to fecure the rights of the people, and fuch an attention paid even to their opinions, that the number of foreign officers was limited to fifty, which was lefs than one third of the whole; the fol diers were alfo to be proteftants, to become naturalized fubjects, and to take the oath ift George I. And fo tenacious was the minifter and parliament then with refpect to the act of fettlement, fo careful of the fmalleft violation, that the law which enabled the crown to take thofe Germans into its fervice, provided that they fhould ferve in America only, and that none of the foreign officers fhould bear any commiffion higher than that of Lieutenant-Colonel. far were we then from putting the ftrong fortreffes of this empire into the poffeflion of foreigners, that a It was fhewn, that former ad- very deferving naturalized officer miniftrations had been fo tender could never arrive at the command and cautious with refpect to em- of a regiment of his own countryploying foreigners, and the vigi- men, which he had a principal lance and jealoufy of parliament fhare in raifing and forming. And upon that fubject was fo well un-fo widely different. were the prinderstood, that in the height of the ciples and modes of acting a few turbulence, heat, and danger of years back, from the doctrines the late war, when the fate of em- which are held out at prefent. pires feemed at ftake, and our annual levies for the army and navy, were not much fewer than twenty So They alfo obferved, that fo lately as the year 1768, when the crown thought an augmentation of the the army in Ireland, from 12000 to 15000 men neceffary, in order thereby to ftrengthen the foreign garrifons, without leaving that kingdom defenceless, however neceffary the measure was, and though the Irish parliament, which was to provide the expence, feconded the King's views, yet he did not think himfelf authorized at the head of that body, to make any addition to his forces, though of naturalborn fubjects, without the fanction of the British parliament, which was accordingly obtained by an act paffed for that purpose. a As to what had been repeatedly faid, of not fhewing any diftruft of the Prince upon the throne, it was replied, that no diftruft was meant or entertained; compliments were not to be thought of in queftions of great national concern; nor precedent established as a matter of compliment, which might prove fatal in its confequences to the rights of a people. No Prince ever fat upon a throne that deferved a more unlimited confidence, than our great deliverer King William; yet, with all his virtues, and all the obligations we were under to him, parliament would not indulge him in that measure which went fo near to his heart, of keeping a fingle regiment of Dutch guards here. They who refufed him in that inftance, notwithstanding all his great virtues and qualities,, deferve the higheft applause and honour for their firmnefs in fo doing. If they had been ceremonious, a precedent would not now have been wanting; and the ufage being once eftablished, would upon fome future occafion be applied to the most dangerous purposes. Upon the whole, the oppofition infifted, that the measure was highly illegal and unconftitutional; that it was directly contrary both to the letter and spirit of the law; but that if it had militated with no pofitive law, it would still have been a total infraction, and fundamentally fabverfive, of the first principles of our government. A. noble Earl went fo far, as to pronounce it decifively, to be high treafon against the conftitution, A great Lord at the head of the law, and Speaker of that house, gave up the point, as to Gibraltar and Minorca, not being fuppofed within the kingdom, in the inten tion and fpirit of the law; he befides allowed that the law applied to foreigners; but juftified the measure upon the fame principle, for as America was alfo included in the defcription of within the kingdom, and a rebellion and war were now exifting there, fo the operation of the Bill of Rights must ceafe, until peace was reftored. A noble Lord, high in office, had moved the previous question early in the debate, upon a fuppo fition that a bill of indemnity would be brought into the Houfe of Commons by the minifter, in order to remove the fcruples, and quiet the apprehenfions of the country gentlemen. The idea of an act of indemnity, was however totally reprobated by the other Lords in office, and the noble author endeavoured, as well as he could, to explain away the fubftance of what he had thrown out upon that fubject. The previous question being at length. put, it was carried by a majority of 75, including 22 proxies, to 32, including one proxy, who fupported the motion. In the mean time, the minifter was was continually preffed in the Houfe of Commons by the country gentlemen, for the Indemnity Bill which he had promifed to bring in, and which he did not now seem at all' difpofed to think of. Their perfeverance, however, brought him to an explanation, that though he was perfectly fatisfied of the legality of the meafure, he had no objection to give thofe gentlemen fatisfaction who held another opinion, and were apprehenfive that it might be drawn into a precedent, by concurring with them in any measure, which might tend, as he expreffed it facetiously, to the prefervation of minifters heads upon their fhoulders; but that he had confulted feveral upon the fubject, who joined exactly with himself in opinion, that bills of indemnity were only intended to cover minifters from actions at law; but did not at all operate against criminal charges, nor in any degree bar an impeachment. This opinion was by no means received, and it was on the contrary infifted, that bills of indemnity were acts of grace and favour extended by parliament to minifters, to protect them from punishment for those acts of illegality which they might be guilty of through neceffity, expediency, or human infirmity, where the intention was clear, and the operating motive might be brought in juftification, or mere error, in alleviation of the crime. The minifter then proposed a refolution, by which the measure in queftion was applauded in nearly the terms of the addrefs, and a ftill farther fanction given to it, by declaring it as the opinion of the house, that it neceffarily required a greater degree of difpatch, than was confiftent with waiting for the affembling of parliament. This propofal was fo directly the reverse to the fatisfaction which was demanded, that it was of course rejected; not without fome difap probation of the idea, that any refolution of one house of parliament, fhould be fet up to encounter the established law of the land, founded upon, and growing out of the conftitution. The minifter endeavoured to remove this objection by a conference with the Lords, which would render the refolution the joint act of both houfes. None of these proposals affording any fatisfaction, and none better being offered, one of the country gentlemen gave notice that he would move for leave to bring in an act of indemnity. The minifter, however, thought proper afterwards to take the bufinefs out of his hands, and was himself the mover to bring in the propofed bill. Though this was all that was wished by the country gentlemen, it by no means fatisfied the oppofition, properly fo called, who knew that the bill would be fo contrived, as to appear rather an indulgence offered by the ministers to tender and fcrupulous confciences, and was in fact a compliment to many of their own friends, who would wish in fome measure to balance prefent conduct with former profeffions, than as including any cenfure upon themselves, acknowledgment that an indemnity was neceffary to their fecurity, or effectual condemnation of the measure upon which it was founded, |